...so I crashed a Truther demonstration today...

[EGarrett]

I was going to get some bagels on my lunch break today and lo and behold...there was a 9/11 Truth Demonstration on the corner! Probably about 10-15 people with signs, 9/11 truth shirts and one very vocal guy with a megaphone yelling at cars passing by. They had a video camera but unfortunately it was not on.

First I walked by them and didn't take their CD and materials...then after getting my bagels, I decided that I couldn't let this opportunity pass. So I approached them and asked in my most friendly voice..."So what are we talking about here, guys? NWO, Lizard People?"

I proceeded to chat/debate with two of them for about 15 minutes, as people walked by and started to listen in. (It was very similar to the "Andreas in Hollywood" video where Andreas Lund (xenu.net) got "ambushed" on the side of the street by scientologists who wanted a debate.)

I pretty much dominated both of them, but they didn't really know what was coming. From the way I was dressed, I probably looked like a purse snatcher or something, not a critical thinking/logic/conspiracy geek. There were two of them but I just took the position of "I'm glad you guys are doing this, but as an objective person, YOUR version of events has more holes than the official explanation...so I can't accept it."

Random highlights...

(I was inspecting their handout and free copy of Loose Change)
ME: Okay, here's the thing. I see you have the molten steel thing on here. You're poking a hole in the official explanation. If you're going to do that, you have to also allow people to poke holes in your explanation and then compare...
THEM: There are no holes in our explanation. (Megaphone said the same thing to me)
ME: Yes there are.
THEM: What?
ME: Okay, what do you think hit the World Trade Center? Planes or drones?
THEM: Planes, everybody saw them.
ME: Who piloted the planes?
THEM: I don't know.
ME: How could you fake the pilot? Were his friends and family and the whole airline in on it? Let alone the passengers if you think they weren't murdered.
THEM: We don't know everything about it.
ME: I know. But that's a hole in your theory. That part makes no sense.
THEM: We're just saying we don't know.
ME: But if you ask me how fire could melt steel, as a layman, if I say I don't know, you'd agree that that you had shown a hole in the official explanation.
THEM: (brief pause) All we want to do is investigate.
MEGAPHONE GUY: (in background) NINE-ELEVEN WAS AN INSIDE JOB!

(yes, it was perfect timing)

ME: Well there you go! He didn't say investigate. He just said Nine-Eleven was an Inside Job. That's a theory that I can poke holes in.
(they didn't respond)
----------------------------------------------

THEM: If you take two buildings and suspend them upside down, and put another building under one of them...then drop them, which one will hit the ground first.
ME: Obviously the one with nothing under it.
THEM: Yes.
ME: Because it's free-falling. But the other one has something under it that it's going to hit.
THEM: Yes!
ME: But...as a layman...what if the building is collapsing? Meaning that the structure is giving way...it's not one building falling on top of someone premade that should hold it. It would seem like the whole thing could go down smoothly.
(I don't study demolition I just thought about it)
THEM: ...it was blown-up.
ME: Look. Not knowing the scientific details of demolition. As a normal, objective guy...it makes sense to me that a plane could hit a building then the building would collapse. The structure would be weakened or whatever. What doesn't make sense to me is that the government could pull off a huge conspiracy like this.
(Megaphone drops his megaphone and approaches me again)
MEGAPHONE: "You need to go back to science class!" (his exact words)
ME: See? Now why are you insulting me?
(even the two guys I was talking with apparently acknowledged that I was a lot more friendly then their leader)
-------------------------------------
THEM: Steel melts at blahblah temperature. Fire burns at this temperature. How could fire melt steel?
ME: Well, are you talking about normal steel, or steel that's been hit by a plane?
(I don't know if that was a good response or not, but at the time it seemed to work pretty well)
-------------------------------------
MEGAPHONE: (getting involved AGAIN) If a woman's on the ground with three knives in her back, you can say she was stabbed.
(he goes back to his megaphone before I say anything)
ME: Okay. Of course. But let me tell you why that's wrong. Okay, I'll tell you guys. If a woman's got knives in her, it makes PERFECT sense that she was stabbed. That's going to have less holes than any other explanation. Yours doesn't. It has as many or more...
-------------------------------------
THEM: (doing spiel about thermite)
ME: Okay, if you guys are right, I might get arrested for saying this...but if we blew up this building right here (the building next to us)...there's going to be all kinds of things that we can't predict that will happen. Or stuff that doesn't add up. But what I need to know is. Even if what you're saying is true, why should I believe it was a conspiracy and not just crappy science? Like somebody taking a bad measurement or not sampling right?
(they had no response, I go on to explain false dilemma/burden of proof)
-------------------------------------
(Megaphone yells something at me again)
ME: Hey look, aren't you guys frustrated because you feel like people won't listen to you? I'm listening to you. I'm talking with you guys. Isn't that what you want?
MEGAPHONE: You're not talking, you're debating!

(yes, those were his exact words)
---------------------------------------------------

Anyway...I told them it was a lot of fun arguing with them...and ironically, one of the two guys was dead quiet by the end of it and shook my hand and asked me my name...so he was either gay or I gained his respect. The other guy was pretty far gone but still shook my hand.

They said they come out to that street corner on the 11th of every month, I said I'd be looking for them next time.

If I can, I'll ask them to film it, or I'll bring a camera and put it on my Youtube account. I've never really debated something like this outside of message boards, but I actually did pretty well and I thought very quickly...especially considering there were 3 people arguing with me and I handled them all pretty well. And since there were other people watching, that was important.

I took some pictures of their handouts etc. Not sure if people would find it interesting to see them.

[JAStewart]

Haha good work.

"You're not talking! You're debating!"

Stundie of the Universe.

[Quad4_72]

Nice work. I have always wanted to see how I would fair in a real live nutter vs rationalist showdown but I have yet to meet a twoofer in real life.

[Gravy]

Bravo! It's hard when several people are trying to talk at you. Next time you could hand out numbers, like at a deli. Sounds like you were calm, focused, logical: to truthers that has the same effect as a cross does to a vampire.

[CHF]

Good job EGarrett!

I've been to a couple such "rallies" here in Toronto (that had similar attendance) and one Saturday at GZ in NYC (http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?t=92511).

The best thing about debating twoofers is that we debunkers are pretty familiar with all their talking points but they know almost none of the rebuttals we throw at them.

I felt as if I knew what they'd say before they said it. Meanwhile, they get this hilarious deer-in-the-headlights look when their claims are destroyed.

[Gravy]

Haha good work.

"You're not talking! You're debating!"

Stundie of the Universe.He could have replied, "Oh, yeah? Well, you guys are mass-debating!"

[Alareth]

I've still not met a truther in real life.

[PhantomWolf]

He could have replied, "Oh, yeah? Well, you guys are mass-debating!"

An oldie, but a goodie. ;)

[PhantomWolf]

I've still not met a truther in real life.

That's because they aren't part of reality.

[Reality Believer]

Good show Egarrett. Next time ask them why there is a penguin on the telly. :)

[AZCat]

I've still not met a truther in real life.

I work with two of them. They are bright, educated young men who have fallen into the glamour trap of the 9/11 "truth movement". Fortunately I have had the opportunity to spend some time discussing the events of September 11th in-depth with them and have made some headway. It is easier because I know and respect them (and vice-versa) so we are able to engage in productive dialogue by avoiding all the insults and pettiness (or most of it, anyway).

[JimBenArm]

He could have replied, "Oh, yeah? Well, you guys are mass-debating!"
Would you shake his hand after that?

[EGarrett]

Nice work. I have always wanted to see how I would fair in a real live nutter vs rationalist showdown but I have yet to meet a twoofer in real life.It turns out that all those hours yelling back at the Youtube screen paid off. Hah. Sadly enough I'm only half-joking. Doing that got me in the habit of coming up with good responses right when people said their points and it came in pretty handy. I would definitely do this now whenever I could find a truther demonstration.

Good show Egarrett. Next time ask them why there is a penguin on the telly.What does that mean?

I work with two of them. They are bright, educated young men who have fallen into the glamour trap of the 9/11 "truth movement". Fortunately I have had the opportunity to spend some time discussing the events of September 11th in-depth with them and have made some headway. It is easier because I know and respect them (and vice-versa) so we are able to engage in productive dialogue by avoiding all the insults and pettiness (or most of it, anyway).I feel the same thing. It turns out it's much easier to influence people in person because you can be friendly and emphasize the points and not let them run around and insult you as much. When that Megaphone Guy insulted me I could tell that he came off as the jerk and I seemed really calm and rational.

[parky76]

I live in NYC, and even I have never met a truther.

[AZCat]

I feel the same thing. It turns out it's much easier to influence people in person because you can be friendly and emphasize the points and not let them run around and insult you as much. When that Megaphone Guy insulted me I could tell that he came off as the jerk and I seemed really calm and rational.

I agree. Sometimes internet forums seem like really popular parties with loud music. Conversations are hard to keep on track because of all the other people popping in and out, and some people are more concerned with dancing to the latest tune than what other people are saying.

[T.A.M.]

Nice going EGarrett.

TAM:)

[Reality Believer]

What does that mean?

It is part of a classic Monty Python skit where two matrons debate the purpose of a penguin on top of a telly. It is one of those pop culture references that if you knew what it meant, it would be funny, hopefully. :)
TAMoFeybQTI

[Sword_Of_Truth]

I was going to get some bagels on my lunch break today...

I'm ignoring the rest of your post because you are obviously a j00!
/troofermode

[liverleef]

Great story! Thanks for sharing. I too would love to have a little debate with the twoofer crowd like you did. Strangely, I never meet them. Even the most radically far left (or right) anti-bush people I know admit that the conspiracy story just doesn't add up. The twoofer websites would have you think that there are 2 of them for every person who believes "the official story".

[leftysergeant]

The penguin on the telly actually makes more sense than some twoofer talking points.

(But I still didn't get it. I wonder, sometimes, whether Brits get Brit humor.)

[EGarrett]

I did a little google search, and checked their handouts and this was the event I interrupted...

http://9-11.meetup.com/359/calendar/6852683/

Although they appear to have gotten their DVD's from a different SoCal 9/11 group.

It is part of a classic Monty Python skit where two matrons debate the purpose of a penguin on top of a telly. It is one of those pop culture references that if you knew what it meant, it would be funny, hopefully. lol, I'll give it a look.

[Mobyseven]

Well done, I say. Hopefully you got through the the silent one, even just a little bit.

[MIKILLINI]

Good conversation EG. And you probably changed a mind or two.

This part here:

ME: Well there you go! He didn't say investigate. He just said Nine-Eleven was an Inside Job. That's a theory that I can poke holes in.
(they didn't respond)

Basically sums up their movement in regard to what substantial evidence they have to back up their claim.

[Derwoods]

hmmm los angeles eh? I am sooo tempted to infiltrate their little group, offer to burn dvd's for them, accidentaly burn a version with commentary on it and help them spread the word.

[Brainster]

Good job, EG!

[Derwoods]

oh yeah I forgot to say good job.

I looked at their site, apparently they are gonna have another one in santa monica on the 16th.. oh and the link to a video of the "phenomenal success" of their 11-11 march is there as well: http://9-11.meetup.com/359/calendar/6781450/

Let's do it again. Please join the great 9/11 Truth groups of Southern Cal. on Sunday, Dec. 16th, to celebrate the 234th anniversary of the Boston Tea Party as well as the rejection of The 9/11 Commission Report!! Expect a fun surprise! In addition, we will march in the area to wake up hundreds upon hundreds of citizens to the truth about 9/11.

so far 15 have rsvp'ed.

[Open Blinded]

Good Job EG,
I have been thinking about doing the same to the few truthers here in Portland, OR. I have been watching some of their videos to see what they are preaching so I have good rebuttals.

Problem is they also talk about bush impeachment, banks, and all sorts of anti-government stuff and I would probably have to stay focused on the 911 issues. I am thinking about first just getting info from them and not letting them know I am a debunker, then come back with printouts of evidence that debunks what they are saying and their flyers. Much like Gravy does, however I have not done the extensive research he has but I think the basics will be enough for these people.

I am also going to take the approach of being calm and nice. I want to get across that I don't mind them questioning the government but I do mind them distorting the facts and spouting lies to the common person.

good luck

[Open Blinded]

oh yeah I forgot to say good job.

I looked at their site, apparently they are gonna have another one in santa monica on the 16th.. oh and the link to a video of the "phenomenal success" of their 11-11 march is there as well: URL


so far 15 have rsvp'ed.

You know, that video isn't that bad. If I didn't know how silly the Twoof movement was I would think about marching with them. No one is yelling at people, I see a few good looking girls, and people are smiling.

[DarkMagician]

Regarding the Penguin sketch, I'm just putting this link down for the dial-up users. (http://wuzzle.org/penguin.html)

[HENTAI DOUKYUSEI JP]

I've still not met a truther in real life.
may be if u stand in the corner holding a twoof sign...

[HENTAI DOUKYUSEI JP]

hmmm los angeles eh? I am sooo tempted to infiltrate their little group, offer to burn dvd's for them, accidentaly burn a version with commentary on it and help them spread the word.
better yet, write subtittles that point out their lies on the video.
wouldn't it be hilarious to be handed a DVD from a twoofer with messages that point out their lies without them even knowing about it?

[chillzero]

I live in NYC, and even I have never met a truther.

I used to date one.

There was a member here a while back that I was convinced was him :boggled: but it wasn't :cool:. He used the same style of mockery as a comeback, and pinpointed one thing to concentrate on, while ignoring the rest of the point. His username was something like 7thKingdom.

[Coffee]

Way to go EGarrett!


I live in NYC, and even I have never met a truther.

One of my employees is a truther. He claims to be a member of this forum but will not tell me his username. Sometimes at lunch he'll mention posts from this forum so I know he lurks through the threads. He believes that there was some type of CD involved in 9/11. Of course, he does not have evidence to back up his claim.

[JimBenArm]

The penguin on the telly actually makes more sense than some twoofer talking points.

(But I still didn't get it. I wonder, sometimes, whether Brits get Brit humor.)
Actually, this is one of my favorite Monty Python bits.

[Alferd_Packer]

-------------------------------------
THEM: Steel melts at blahblah temperature. Fire burns at this temperature. How could fire melt steel?
ME: Well, are you talking about normal steel, or steel that's been hit by a plane?
(I don't know if that was a good response or not, but at the time it seemed to work pretty well)
-------------------------------------

Well actually it is not a very good response.


Next time, just point out that there is no credible evidence of molten steel at ground zero prior to the building collapse. Point out that the "jet fuel only burns at "X" temprature" argument is invalid because the value commonly cited for "X" is for an open flame under standarad laboratory conditions. In the real world you need to account for the deviations from the standard (i.e. the increase) that would result from burning the fuel inside and enclosed space like a building without allowing the heat to excape.

Point out that ordinary house fires can generate temperatures well in excess of what they claim to be the maximum temperature for jet fuel.

Point out that the steel only had to be heated up to 600 degrees C in order for it to lose half of it's strength.

Point out that aluminum from the aircraft and the building cladding would have melted long before the melting temperature of steel was reached.

Ask them if they know how many tons of aluminum are in a Boeing 757.

Ask them if they know how many tons of aluminum were used to clad the building.

But otherwise, you get an "A" for your effort.

[~enigma~]

I used to date one.

There was a member here a while back that I was convinced was him :boggled: but it wasn't :cool:. He used the same style of mockery as a comeback, and pinpointed one thing to concentrate on, while ignoring the rest of the point. His username was something like 7thKingdom.
28thkingdom Ms. Zero :)

[bonkey]

Point out that the "jet fuel only burns at "X" temprature" argument is invalid because the value commonly cited for "X" is for an open flame under standarad laboratory conditions. In the real world you need to account for the deviations from the standard (i.e. the increase) that would result from burning the fuel inside and enclosed space like a building without allowing the heat to excape.

Actually, thats not why the jetfuel temp argument is invalid.

The jetfuel temp argument is invalid because no-one is claiming thet jet-fuel did anything other than start one hell of a massive office fire. It is the resultant one hell of an office fire that reached temps to weaken steel.

As a simpler retort, you could perhaps point out that one can light an oxy-acetylene blowtorch with a match. For the purposes of calculating what that torch can cut, does one take the temps that the match could reach?

[Alferd_Packer]

Actually, thats not why the jetfuel temp argument is invalid.

The jetfuel temp argument is invalid because no-one is claiming thet jet-fuel did anything other than start one hell of a massive office fire. It is the resultant one hell of an office fire that reached temps to weaken steel.

As a simpler retort, you could perhaps point out that one can light an oxy-acetylene blowtorch with a match. For the purposes of calculating what that torch can cut, does one take the temps that the match could reach?


Good point, however, the fact is, truthers that claim that jet fuel can not burn any hotter than "X" temperature are making a scientifically invalid claim.

[bje]

MEGAPHONE: You're not talking, you're debating!


And as always, they're not listening....

Excellent job, EG.

Someone got a picture of Mr. Megaphone:

http://forums.randi.org/imagehosting/thum_1593947601f473f2ad.jpg (http://forums.randi.org/vbimghost.php?do=displayimg&imgid=9687)

[Pardalis]

Speaking of 28thkingdom...

http://www.davidicke.com/forum/showthread.php?t=14381


:D

(found him by accident btw)

[jhunter1163]

What I want to know is, did EGarrett ever get his bagels, or did the delay caused by the Twoofers force him to trudge dejectedly back to his workplace, bagel-less, hungry, and with fragments of debunked Twoofy agruments clinging to his clothes?

[Hokulele]

(found him by accident btw)


Nothing happens by accident. :tinfoil

[sackett]

Good going, Agent Garrett. No way in hell could I have done it.

Well, maybe if you swept the area clean of blunt objects first. Something about the trootheroids that makes me

decline to risk self-incrimination before the fact.

[Stout]

Ok..back after that sidetrack into Davidicke land.

I've actually got a meeting with a newly minted truther tonight.

Last week a friend of mine was given a copy of Loose Change and appears to have bought into it hook, line and sinker. When I tried to talk to her about it, all she really came back with is..."that's your opinion"

Now,, she's very woo oriented, as in she went to Burning Man for the metaphysical workshops, as opposed to the rest of us who go to spin fire, so I'm going to try a kinder, gentler approach.

I sent her a link to Screw Loose Change and I have my fingers crossed ( how woo like ) that she actually watched it. I'm just hoping she's able to appreciate the difference between opinion and fact, otherwise, I'm dead

Wish me luck.

[peteweaver]

You should have pointed out that steel doesn't have to melt to get soft, blacksmiths have been shoeing horses for years by weakening metal, so that it becomes bendy.

Imagine how hard it would be to shoe a horse if every horse shoe had to be cast in one go...

Fire didn't melt the steel of the towers but it did weaken it. The crashes, increased the load on the surviving load bearing members aswell....

[chillzero]

28thkingdom Ms. Zero :)

That's the one - thanks.

[bonkey]

Good point, however, the fact is, truthers that claim that jet fuel can not burn any hotter than "X" temperature are making a scientifically invalid claim.

I would take the position that relevance tops validity.

If you correct someone by pointing out that under the correct conditions, jet fuel can burn hotter, the obvious comeback will be that those conditions weren't shown to be present which is true. (They weren't shown to be present because its irrelevant to the model of what happened).

I've seen no end of threads here and elsewhere which follow this pattern. People are so interested in showing something to be factually correct or incorrect that the relevance gets lost, the discussion gets sidetracked, and sooner or later the same point arises again.

Nip it in the bud. Show that the entire argument is ancillary and it ceases to matter if they're right or not.

Besides, I think its more advantageous to show a lack in someone's logic and understanding of what the issues really are, then it is to show that their grasp of some finer points of irrelevant science is missing.

[Stout]

I recently saw a good example of the effects of an ordinary fire on steel posted here. I can't remember the name, but it was referred to as so and so's neckties.

It was an American civil war idea where the Confederate soldiers ripped up Union railroad rails and not only bent them, but twisted them after laying the center section of the trail across a campfire. Apparently, the steer was such a poor conductor of heat that the Southerners could grab, and bend, the rail with their bare hands.

[JimBenArm]

That's the one - thanks.
I miss 28K. He was my favorite nutbar. Other than Paydays!

[jhunter1163]

I recently saw a good example of the effects of an ordinary fire on steel posted here. I can't remember the name, but it was referred to as so and so's neckties.

It was an American civil war idea where the Confederate soldiers ripped up Union railroad rails and not only bent them, but twisted them after laying the center section of the trail across a campfire. Apparently, the steer was such a poor conductor of heat that the Southerners could grab, and bend, the rail with their bare hands.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sherman's_neckties

Here ya go.

[Stout]

Thanks jhunter

[jhunter1163]

No problem. This does pretty much put the lie to the notion that jet fuel fires aren't hot enough to bend steel. How hot can a campfire be?

[JimBenArm]

Am I the only one disappointed with the OP of this thread because it didn't say "with an SUV."?

[SDC]

I actually expected a snappy punchline. You know, like, "Not with my wife, you don't!"

[CHF]

Yesterday the Toronto twoof movement held another rally.

Attendance? Approximately 10 (http://9-11.meetup.com/282/?gj=sj2).

:dl:

[MIKILLINI]

Yesterday the Toronto twoof movement held another rally.

Attendance? Approximately 10 (http://9-11.meetup.com/282/?gj=sj2).

:dl:

Now that indicates a movement in a state of non-movement.:D

CHF, I see that site has 153 members and they've had 47 meetings... What do you suppose they discuss at those meetings? How to get more twoofers without presenting evidence?:rolleyes:

[scissorhands]

Toronto 9/11 Truth

The 9/11 Truth Movement is a non-violent effort by thousands (if not tens of thousands) of highly respected professionals in numerous areas of expertise.....
<snip>


The homepage certainly sets the honesty levels of what is to come from thereon in.
:D

[CptColumbo]

["Twoofer" logic]47 meetings of 10 people = 470 members. [/"Twoofer" logic]

[gmanontario]

Yesterday the Toronto twoof movement held another rally.

Attendance? Approximately 10 (http://9-11.meetup.com/282/?gj=sj2).

:dl:
So THAT's what that was...

Well I can see the count being approximately 10 simply because if they had to count to more than 10, someone would have to take their shoes off and it's mighty cold downtown these days.

[Stout]

Hummm 153 members in that Toronto meet up group....153 in a city of how large ?

Interestingly, they seem to have quite a few girl truthers, something I never really thought about seeing all the photos of the LCFC "event" featured young guys, I figured my friend was an anomaly.

However, last month another female friend of mine just blurted out the whole microchip, NWO story while we were sitting in the pub sharing beers. She'd seen an ad on TV for a credit card with a microchip in it and put 2 and 2 together and come up with "evidence"

Now, me, being a frequenter of this forum and having developed a sensitivity to these issues, saw the same ad she did however, I, jumped off the couch and consulted the oracle of the google to find out what this was all about.

I casually explained to her what the microchip in the card was for ( microchip + PIN ) instead of magnetic stripe + signature and that this was a security feature not a tracking device. She believed me....whew..and I emailed her some backup documentation the next day.

Point is...it seems to take only minutes to create a truther but hours to try to get through to one using common sense.

[gmanontario]

Hummm 153 members in that Toronto meet up group....153 in a city of how large ?


About 3 million. Works out to a percentage of approx. 0.000051 % support the twoofers. Teh revolution is nigh!!!111!!! :D

Interestingly, they seem to have quite a few girl truthers, something I never really thought about seeing all the photos of the LCFC "event" featured young guys, I figured my friend was an anomaly.

In my experience stupidity isn't sexist.

[LashL]

About 3 million. Works out to a percentage of approx. 0.000051 % support the twoofers. Teh revolution is nigh!!!111!!! :D

As of the 2006 census, the population of metropolitan Toronto was approximately 5,406,300.

I'll leave the math to you to determine what percentage of support that gives the twoofers. ;)

Oh, and I almost forgot - Nice work, EGarrett!

[A W Smith]

Speaking of 28thkingdom...

http://www.davidicke.com/forum/showthread.php?t=14381


:D

(found him by accident btw)

And this in refernece to "the Myth busters'
Professional Skepticism is about mind control... it's designed to hide the spiritual side of ourselves and the universe. These guys - like everyone else on t.v. are what you call Reptilians... yes, he's an ***hole... because he is trying to warp people's minds.

[T.A.M.]

Skepticism is not about mind control...it is about EXPOSING THE BALONEY!!!

TAM:)

[AZCat]

Skepticism is not about mind control...it is about EXPOSING THE BALONEY!!!

TAM:)

I thought that was streaking... :confused:

[EGarrett]

hmmm los angeles eh? I am sooo tempted to infiltrate their little group, offer to burn dvd's for them, accidentaly burn a version with commentary on it and help them spread the word.Maybe we should just rent a digital camera and go start another "talk" and put it on Youtube?

What I want to know is, did EGarrett ever get his bagels, or did the delay caused by the Twoofers force him to trudge dejectedly back to his workplace, bagel-less, hungry, and with fragments of debunked Twoofy agruments clinging to his clothes?I got the bagels then talked to them on the way back. I didn't finish my lunch but ate it at my desk later. :)

Good going, Agent Garrett. No way in hell could I have done it.

Well, maybe if you swept the area clean of blunt objects first. Something about the trootheroids that makes me

decline to risk self-incrimination before the fact.They're far less irritating in-person...possibly because it's much easier to control the conversation and show a positive tone that disarms them. When you can show how and why someone is wrong, you don't have to get angry or insult. I think the Andreas vs. Scientology video really helped me see that also.

I thought that was streaking...Interestingly enough, I was going to bring up the Feynman/Challenger/NASA example as a way to demonstrate that even the best engineers can make huge mistakes when it comes to error checking or estimating the strength of their creations...so again there could be more human error in what we expected to happen when the buildings were struck.

[AZCat]

Interestingly enough, I was going to bring up the Feynman/Challenger/NASA example as a way to demonstrate that even the best engineers can make huge mistakes when it comes to error checking or estimating the strength of their creations...so again there could be more human error in what we expected to happen when the buildings were struck.

It is also an excellent example of operational breakdown. Morton-Thiokol engineers were aware of the limitations of the o-ring on the boosters but were unable to pass their concerns up the bureaucratic ladder.

[jhunter1163]

In that case, EGarrett, it was a win/win deal for you. You got to apply some smackdown to a few Truthers and got some delicious bagels as well. Nice work.

I like to think that, thanks to the preparation I've received here, I could handle pretty much any argument a Truther threw at me. Now if I could only find one...

[gumboot]

I felt as if I knew what they'd say before they said it. Meanwhile, they get this hilarious deer-in-the-headlights look when their claims are destroyed.


Yes my one experience in real life with a Truther was like that. It was quite surreal, knowing what they'd say next, almost verbatim. It was quite funnily when they pulled out what they thought was a brilliant new fact, only to have me ask a series of (unanswered) questions about the details of the claim, before soundly demonstrating that not only could I counter ever aspect with logic, but I knew more about the claim itself than the truther did.

Putting aside for a moment their stupid beliefs, what astounds me about Conspiracy Theorists is how little they actually know about 9/11.

-Gumboot

[gumboot]

And this in refernece to "the Myth busters'


If I'm a Reptillian does that mean I get to live forever?

-Gumboot

[scissorhands]

I got the bagels then talked to them on the way back.

:boggled:

Did anyone see you doing this?

[westprog]

I would take the position that relevance tops validity.

If you correct someone by pointing out that under the correct conditions, jet fuel can burn hotter, the obvious comeback will be that those conditions weren't shown to be present which is true. (They weren't shown to be present because its irrelevant to the model of what happened).

I've seen no end of threads here and elsewhere which follow this pattern. People are so interested in showing something to be factually correct or incorrect that the relevance gets lost, the discussion gets sidetracked, and sooner or later the same point arises again.

Nip it in the bud. Show that the entire argument is ancillary and it ceases to matter if they're right or not.

Besides, I think its more advantageous to show a lack in someone's logic and understanding of what the issues really are, then it is to show that their grasp of some finer points of irrelevant science is missing.


The other danger is that along the way, some incorrect statement will be made. The statement might have no relevance whatsoever, but it will be siezed on and repeated as confirmation of something.It's generally better to concentrate on essentials.

That said, when the same silly points are being made again and again, it's tempting to diverge on some interesting topic sometimes.

[SpitfireIX]

Yesterday the Toronto twoof movement held another rally.

Attendance? Approximately 10 (http://9-11.meetup.com/282/?gj=sj2).

:dl:


As I said several months ago, some of you who live in or near Toronto should show up at a meeting and pretend to be Pod People (http://www.oilempire.us/pod.html).

This "pod" person showed up at one of our meetings with no connection to any other current member (this was public through meetup.org, mind you) and seemed intent on steering the subject of our meetings towards the "pod" issue and would speak of nothing but it. He insisted repeatedly that we incorporate video of the "pod" into a public presentation for all to see, and talked incessantly of "In Plane Site" and "letsroll911.org". Coincidentally, another more long term member of the group passed out references to your page about bogus websites, etc., at the same meeting this person showed up at. That evening I researched it, and sent out a letter later that week to our mailing list addressing "pod" person infiltration. Literally, within hours of sending that email (which was also sent to the potential infiltrator), he contacted one of our key members and said that he would be no longer be involved with the group, and that he had his own ideas about how he would like to approach this issue. I can't personally say that I know what his motives were but admittedly it was a strange, paranoia inducing experience. [emphasis added]


That would undoubtedly serve even further to expose their paranoia. :)

[Dr Adequate]

Well I can see the count being approximately 10 simply because if they had to count to more than 10, someone would have to take their shoes off and it's mighty cold downtown these days. Some of the more gifted twoofers would make it up to 12.

[Vincent Vega]

From the way I was dressed, I probably looked like a purse snatcher or something, not a critical thinking/logic/conspiracy geek.

LOL, so how exactly does a purse snatcher and debunker geek dress anyway?



ME: Well there you go! He didn't say investigate. He just said Nine-Eleven was an Inside Job. That's a theory that I can poke holes in.
(they didn't respond)
----------------------------------------------
.


I always LOVED that contradiction.

TRUTHER: "9-11 was an inside job!!"

SANE PERSON: "Really how. What's your theory?"

TRUTHER: "I DONT KNOW! We have no theory. We're just asking questions!"

I guess "9-11 might have been an inside job!!" just doesn't have the ring to it.

[bonkey]

TRUTHER: "9-11 was an inside job!!"

SANE PERSON: "Really how. What's your theory?"

TRUTHER: "I DONT KNOW! We have no theory. We're just asking questions!"



SANE PERSON: Then replace the !! with ?? please.

[eromitlab]

Truther: We're just asking questions!

Sane person: Well, you sounded pretty declarative a second ago, when you were shouting "9/11 was an inside job" in the form of a statement, not a question.

Truther: You're a government agent! COINTELPRO!

[Sword_Of_Truth]

Speaking of 28thkingdom...

http://www.davidicke.com/forum/showthread.php?t=14381


:D

(found him by accident btw)

28thkingdom: What do I think? I think the mythbusters are ********...

King: Ugly ******** too.

http://www.karibyron.org/pictures/Kari%20Byron%201.jpg

Haha! Bedunked! :D

[LashL]

Some of the more gifted twoofers would make it up to 12.

True.

Sadly, the "more gifted" among them number in the single digits.

[Graham Ross]

If I can, I'll ask them to film it, or I'll bring a camera and put it on my Youtube account. I've never really debated something like this outside of message boards, but I actually did pretty well and I thought very quickly...especially considering there were 3 people arguing with me and I handled them all pretty well. And since there were other people watching, that was important.

You should do that. There needs to be more sane on YouTube to balance out the crazy.

[EGarrett]

LOL, so how exactly does a purse snatcher and debunker geek dress anyway?I think I was dressed all in black with a black jacket and a black knit-cap. Possibly with black leather gloves. It might've also been a few days since I'd shaved. I only shave once a week.

I always LOVED that contradiction.

TRUTHER: "9-11 was an inside job!!"

SANE PERSON: "Really how. What's your theory?"

TRUTHER: "I DONT KNOW! We have no theory. We're just asking questions!"

I guess "9-11 might have been an inside job!!" just doesn't have the ring to it.Yeah. They want the authority of shouting out a conclusion without the responsibility of having to defend it. Of course, it's very easy to point out that you're "just asking questions" about their own version of events.

You should do that. There needs to be more sane on YouTube to balance out the crazy.Seems like it would be pretty easy to do. I might have to recruit another SoCal JREFer to be my cameraman though.

[LashL]

Seems like it would be pretty easy to do. I might have to recruit another SoCal JREFer to be my cameraman though.


That would be excellent.

[Reality Believer]

.....
Seems like it would be pretty easy to do. I might have to recruit another SoCal JREFer to be my cameraman though.
I'm in Orange County, and I have a nice camera. :)

[technoextreme]

I would take the position that relevance tops validity.

If you correct someone by pointing out that under the correct conditions, jet fuel can burn hotter, the obvious comeback will be that those conditions weren't shown to be present which is true. (They weren't shown to be present because its irrelevant to the model of what happened).


Well the best way to bust that illogical line of woo is to show them WTC 5. Some of the pictures in the NIST report had made yelling out explecitives when I saw the damage an office fire alone could do and I wasn't a CT.

[jhunter1163]

A new sniglet enters the vernacular: explicitive. Meaning: To suggest a very specific bad act. Differs from "expletive".

Expletive: (Rule10) you, you government shill.

Explicitive: (Rule10) you in the (rule10), you government shill.

Thanks, Techno. I'll be using that one.

ETA: Ten bucks says I get a yellow card for this.

[EGarrett]

I'm in Orange County, and I have a nice camera. :)Excellent. I also purchased my Christmas gift to myself today...a digital camera that can shoot 4-10 minutes of high quality video per memory card. Unfortunately I have an office party today. But I'm going to check the 9/11-meetup calendar and see about possible parties to crash.

I have a feeling that wasn't the intended purpose of the 9/11-meetup site. :)

[thaiboxerken]

Has anyone made a hand-out or pamphlet with thither arguments debunked?