Have you ever respected a truther?

[Oscar]

Have you ever respected a truther? (and a few other random opinions).

Reading this forum has led me to a few conclusions. Not all of them palatable.

1. Truthers, as far as I can see, are without exception nincompoops. We try and rationalise their thinking, being rational types ourselves, but forget that we're dealing with woo-woo central. They never fail to give themselves away as barking. And I think at some fundamental level they know it. They obfuscate, they dodge, weave and lie, but they know it, which must make them very unhappy people.

2. You won't like this, fellow debunkers, but I have to say it worries me how seriously we take ourselves when we put on our professional caps to rip apart the latest truther to beat his chest. It's rather like watching a steam train run over a rabbit and then parp its horn with a victory salute. A little light-heartedness when faced with care in the community cases is better in my opinion.

3. The crux: Have you ever read on this board, or met in real life, a truther you thought had a real opinion worth listening to. A person who could sweep the carpet from under your feet from time to time. Someone you had some respect for.

Well, that's the question. It's something that's been on my excuse for a mind for some time.

[Southwind17]

Personally, I think it all depends on what, exactly, you mean by "truther". I believe I know what the term is generally meant to convey, but given your conclusion and accusations I think you need to be very specific. For example, I confess to having been sceptical in the past of the "official" line for certain events until convinced otherwise. Did that make me a temporary truther? I'm sure most of us here agree that there's absolutely nothing wrong with being sceptical, unless, of course, your mind is closed to evidence to the contrary. At what point does a sceptic become a truther? Presumably when he/she refuses to accept what the evidence is or should be telling him/her, I suppose.

[Oscar]

Ah, good points, southwind. I ought to be more precise.

What I mean is the barrier of closed mindedness I feel when I read posts by Heiwa or Homeland Insurgency or Tweeter or Bill or, well, any number of them. If they put forward an idea that held water I'd be there investigating, being open-minded and all that, but they don't. They seem to sit behind a barricade of some sort of psychological construction. It's the insularity and lack of open mindedness that frightens me

That's it.

Do not change a user's name so as to insult.

[Southwind17]

Ah, good points, southwind. I ought to be more precise.

What I mean is the barrier of closed mindedness I feel when I read posts by Heiwa or Homeland Insurgency or Tweeter or Bill or, well, any number of them. If they put forward an idea that held water I'd be there investigating, being open-minded and all that, but they don't. They seem to sit behind a barricade of some sort of psychological construction. It's the insularity and lack of open mindedness that frightens me

That's it.

You do realize this comment can apply equally to religious people as well as "truthers". Now that's frightening, given the numbers involved!

[UNLoVedRebel]

Have you ever respected a truther?
No
3. The crux: Have you ever read on this board, or met in real life, a truther you thought had a real opinion worth listening to. A person who could sweep the carpet from under your feet from time to time. Someone you had some respect for.
No

[triforcharity]

I say we leave Religion out of this. That is a whole 'nother bag of worms.

Anyway, I was once (For about 10 minutes) a skeptic. I saw loose change about a month ago, and thought it might be true. But, a quick google search, and I found Mark Roberts' website, and ended up here.

My general consensus is this.
I believe every one of them to have some kind of severe brain damage that is caused by something I cannot pronounce. And I bet that the disease is very long (like maybe , headinrectumfortoolongandhasntseenthelightofdayfor years), un-cureable and possibly (in the most severe cases ) Fatal.

But, the people who are "trutherts" that are polite, and listen to evidence when it is presented, and have an open mind, I have no problem with. Its the ones like killtown, Heiwa, and anyone who associates with Loose Change in any way, shape, or form, that I have no respect for. The ones I would like to see dissapear are the ones who go to ground zero every year and say that FDNY and various other entities of government are the murderers. THAT I cannot stand, as it is disrespectfull to hallowed ground.

<~~~ Steps off soapbox.

[Oliver]

You do realize this comment can apply equally to religious people as well as "truthers".


Actually, that isn't a coincidence at all.

[dtugg]

Have you ever respected a truther?

No.

[TruthersLie]

There are a few Truthers with whom I can have a conversation and still have respect for.

But generally I wouldn't label them as full on truthers.

Gregory Ulrich and Alan Lawson are the two that I have the most respect for.

Now Gregory for calling out other truthers for their outright lies and inability to police their own movement.

I respect Alan for his work on debunking the "no planer" twoofs. But he is most definately a truther nearly a twoof.

but I do have respect for both of them, while I fully disagree with them.

[Minadin]

There are people who can be duped or convinced who might not be unintelligent. In my experience they're usually also unwilling to invest a lot of effort into verifying the sources of the information they're buying - but that means they're also not your typical rabid internet truther, either.

[jhunter1163]

Gregory Urich and Frank Greening both subscribe to the truther agenda, but they have the intellectual honesty to admit when they're wrong and to tell people like Szamboti pushing garbage papers just exactly why it's garbage. That's all too rare among Truthers, and I respect them for it.

[240-185]

In my first days of debunking, I respected truthers because I thought they could have some facts right.



It appeared not.

[Southwind17]

I say we leave Religion out of this. That is a whole 'nother bag of worms.

I agree we should leave religion out per se, my point being, though (which I think your comment suggests you've slightly missed), that if Oscar's rationale for derogating Truthers applies to other categories or groups, but more importantly to categories or groups that make up the majority of the population, than either such rationale might not be justifiable (at least in the minds of the majority!) or perhaps targeting Truthers, as easy as that might seem, is being unfairly discriminatory, or maybe both!

[MarkyX]

No, why should I? There is plenty of information on the internet proving them wrong, yet they still cling onto stupid theories.

[Tricky]

This topic is borderline, but if you can discuss it without bickering and personal attacks, like the ones I moved to AAH, then we'll let it stay for now. Further examples of bickering and personal attacks will be considered a deliberate disregard of moderator instructions. I think you all know what that might result in.

[Horatius]

I agree we should leave religion out per se, my point being, though (which I think your comment suggests you've slightly missed), that if Oscar's rationale for derogating Truthers applies to other categories or groups, but more importantly to categories or groups that make up the majority of the population, than either such rationale might not be justifiable (at least in the minds of the majority!) or perhaps targeting Truthers, as easy as that might seem, is being unfairly discriminatory, or maybe both!



There's at least one major difference between truthers and theists.

The claims theists make are usually about things that are impossible to prove by the tools of science, which isn't true of the truthers. It's easy to show at what temperature steel begins to lose strength; it's not so easy to determine how many angels can dance on the head of a pin.

I'm up for a good debate about angels (well, not really, but you see what I mean), but trying to tell me that steel doesn't act the way every legitimate scientist and engineer says it does is only going to make me think the person is an idiot.

[Stellafane]

As I've said before, I do not believe that anyone who is intelligent, stable, informed, and honest can be a 9/11 Truther (at least not for very long). At least one of those traits must be missing in order for Trutherism to creep into your mental psyche. Therefore I can't really say that I've actively respected any Truther I've encountered. There have been a few for whom I've had more sympathy than others. But my respect has been in short supply when it comes to these guys.

[Southwind17]

There's at least one major difference between truthers and theists.

The claims theists make are usually about things that are impossible to prove by the tools of science, which isn't true of the truthers. It's easy to show at what temperature steel begins to lose strength; it's not so easy to determine how many angels can dance on the head of a pin.

I'm up for a good debate about angels (well, not really, but you see what I mean), but trying to tell me that steel doesn't act the way every legitimate scientist and engineer says it does is only going to make me think the person is an idiot.

I might be inclined to agree, which is why I suggested Oscar should be specific as to what he really means when referring to "Truthers". However, I'm not sure your differentiator is quite as clear cut as you might like to think. I think it's essentially the same inherent pathological denial of the bleedin' obvious that's at play, possibly compounded with a heavy and unrelenting dose of cynicism in the case of the "Truthers" that I believe Oscar has in mind.

[Quad4_72]

No, I have never respected a twoofer.

[eromitlab]

I try to deal with everyone I come across with some level of respect. Truthers have this nasty habit of blowing that out of the water by showering me with insults, condescension, harassment and even the occasional threat. Not to mention their peddling of things known and easily proven to be falsehoods and outright lies under the banner of truth is really unconscionable. So the answer is no.

[jhunter1163]

On consideration of further information which has been provided to me privately, I must withdraw my earlier statement regarding respecting Dr. Greening. I was aware in general terms of the circumstances of his banning here, but I did not know just how far beyond the pale he had gone. A person exhibiting such behavior deserves no respect, however competent he might be in his field.

My comment regarding Gregory Urich stands. My pontificating is complete. We now return you to your regularly scheduled thread.

[Southwind17]

I try to deal with everyone I come across with some level of respect.

Is that so? "Try", "deal" and "some level" are very subjective words!

Truthers have this nasty habit of blowing that out of the water by showering me with insults, condescension, harassment and even the occasional threat.

You sound like the provocative type to me. Am I right?! ;)

[Audible Click]

I've never met a twoofer IRL but if I did I'd be polite in refuting their evidence, up to a point. As for these threads in this sub-forum, all I can say is that the regular skeptic posters have way more patience then I could ever have.

[dropzone]

I try to deal with everyone I come across with some level of respect. Truthers have this nasty habit of blowing that out of the water by showering me with insults, condescension, harassment and even the occasional threat. Not to mention their peddling of things known and easily proven to be falsehoods and outright lies under the banner of truth is really unconscionable. So the answer is no.This. I try. God, and several other Gods, know I try, but even I, an ex-hippy from Back in the Day, know there's a point where the claims become humored, and beyond that they become symptoms. Truthers exhibit symptoms that are obvious only to mental health professionals, and those of us who have dealt with their patients. I respect them as humans, as far as one can respect nothing about the other than the bones in his feet, but I must distract them from anything else.

[Southwind17]

This. I try. God, and several other Gods, know I try, but even I, an ex-hippy from Back in the Day, know there's a point where the claims become humored, and beyond that they become symptoms. Truthers exhibit symptoms that are obvious only to mental health professionals, and those of us who have dealt with their patients. I respect them as humans, as far as one can respect nothing about the other than the bones in his feet, but I must distract them from anything else.

So it is pathalogical then! I was right! :D

[longfellow]

I cannot say if I have ever respected a 'truther'. . .only because I've never been face-to-face with one (I'm in the mid-west USA...'round these parts '911 truth' only exists in the aether that we call the internet). By that same token, I cannot say if I have ever disrespected a 'truther', either.

I may have made the occasional snarky comment on this board or elsewhere concerning 'truthers' but that's a totally different case. I am of the opinion that the vast majority of '911 truthers' that have been banned here are representative of only a handful of people. It is also my opinion that they know exactly what they are doing (peddling woo, that is. . .be it for profit or not) making their actions disingenuous at best and egregious at worst.

On this board and elsewhere the 'truthers' are worthy of nothing more than snark and pith and snark and pith do not a disrespectful comment make.

To borrow the vernacular, however, I most certainly have respected 'truthers' of both the JFK and Moon Hoax varieties. I don't have much choice, you see, as they are members of my own family.

Doubtless, my mother will go to her grave (well, urn actually, we're a crematin' kinda folk) believing that Lyndon Johnson had JFK killed. And my wife, matriarch of my own little dynasty, my soul-mate, my sihaya, despite the fact that we attended an Apollo 11 Landing Party whilst courting holds the belief that it was all faked on some sound-stage by that guy that did the movie with the apes and the obelisk. . .sound familiar?

My admittedly faulty memory indicates I've seen statistics (and yes, I know what they say about statistics) stating that quite a few people profess to believe some form of a Moon Hoax or JFK conspiracy theory. I can buy that. Within my purview I know people who do. I'm old enough to have seen both (JFK and the Moon Hoaxes) rise from their beginnings until they've become so firmly entrenched into the American pyche that a lot of people think something was hinky with one or both events.

And nobody cares. Doesn't matter. There are no repercussions stemming from so many people holding these things to be true. Nothing, nada, zilch, zip.

Pay attention to this part, 'truthers', because it's important. I doubt I'll live long enough to be as far removed from the events of September 11, 2001 as I am from the assassination of JFK and Apollo 11 but some of you will. When it gets to the point where about the same number of people believe '911 truthers' as believe in the Moon Hoax or the JFK conspiracies, guess what?

Nobody cares. Doesn't matter. There are no repercussions stemming from so many people holding these things to be true. Nothing, nada, zilch, zip.

Have a nice life.

[leftysergeant]

Urich and Greening were actually useful at times. Strangely, I actually have some kind feelings for Max Photon. Goofy beyond all reason, but at least he has a sense of humor, never really malicious. Just bloody annoying when you are trying to have a rational discussion with someone else.

And then there is Russel Pickering. Totally wrong about most everything, but he was actually interested in knowing what was wrong with the model he had built in his mind. I have had some very productive discussions with him.

So yes, there are a few I can respect.

Bloody very.

Most are rather like blow flies.

[BenBurch]

One or two of the folks who believe that there was a conspiracy to do nothing make reasonable cases, though lacking on evidence, and I respect their right to do that. There was a time I thought that marginally possible, too.

[Robster, FCD]

I absolutely respect truthers, except when they are talking about troof or woo.

[Minadin]

And then there is Russel Pickering. Totally wrong about most everything, but he was actually interested in knowing what was wrong with the model he had built in his mind. I have had some very productive discussions with him.

So yes, there are a few I can respect.

Bloody very.

Most are rather like blow flies.

I have to agree - Russ had some bad ideas but he did have a fair measure more integrity than most people. (not truthers, people)

[Southwind17]

I absolutely respect truthers, except when they are talking about troof or woo.

But on a serious note doesn't this actually reflect the Forum adage: attack the argument not the arguer?!

Somebody making a stupid statement is not necessarily stupid (well, not necessarily all of the time). Even I have been known to make the occassional marginally stupid statement!

Many people with children will appreciate the important difference between calling your kids stupid and pointing out to them they've done something stupid!

[peteweaver]

I was surprised to meet one in a pub up in Scotland, he'd seen loose change, and unfortunately believed it. He's a perfectly ordinary person, with an ordinary job, a house, a wife, and he works hard.

I respect him, despite disagreeing with him, he was a thoroughly nice person, and I had a pint with him.

[T.A.M.]

But on a serious note doesn't this actually reflect the Forum adage: attack the argument not the arguer?!

Somebody making a stupid statement is not necessarily stupid (well, not necessarily all of the time). Even I have been known to make the occassional marginally stupid statement!

Many people with children will appreciate the important difference between calling your kids stupid and pointing out to them they've done something stupid!

The difference is in the the frequency and the defense.

occasionally making an error, or a stupid comment is normal...it is human. But most sane people, people I can respect, admit they were wrong, and move on.

The truther:

1. Almost continuously utters proven falsehoods, or unproven speculations.
2. They almost NEVER admit they are wrong.

TAM:)

[bob_cadaver]

I try to show respect for everybody as individuals, but I have no respect for the CT belief system or the cult-like hold it seems to have on True Believers. I feel sorry for most of them, to tell the truth.

[DC]

maybe not so suprising coming from me :) but i also have alot respect of Gregory Urich and Frank Greening. Both helped deconfusing my confusion :)

[FineWine]

maybe not so suprising coming from me :) but i also have alot respect of Gregory Urich and Frank Greening. Both helped deconfusing my confusion :)



Am I nitpicking when I ask if it is accurate to characterize Urich and Greening as "truthers"? Both of them want to believe the U.S. had something to do with the 9/11 attacks, but neither allows his emotional desires to interfere with his science. Wouldn't it be more fair to say that they wish 9/11 had been an inside job, but their respect for reason and evidence just won't permit them to swallow the snake oil?

[DC]

Am I nitpicking when I ask if it is accurate to characterize Urich and Greening as "truthers"? Both of them want to believe the U.S. had something to do with the 9/11 attacks, but neither allows his emotional desires to interfere with his science. Wouldn't it be more fair to say that they wish 9/11 had been an inside job, but their respect for reason and evidence just won't permit them to swallow the snake oil?

i think it is wrong to asume any of them want 9/11 to be an inside job.
Frank isnt an real inside jober neither is Gregory. i think Gregory goes more into the direction of lihop. But best is ask them self. they dont bite.

[Pinch]

Have you ever respected a truther? (and a few other random opinions).

Nope. Impossible.

[Southwind17]

Am I nitpicking when I ask if it is accurate to characterize Urich and Greening as "truthers"? Both of them want to believe the U.S. had something to do with the 9/11 attacks, but neither allows his emotional desires to interfere with his science. Wouldn't it be more fair to say that they wish 9/11 had been an inside job, but their respect for reason and evidence just won't permit them to swallow the snake oil?

I don't know anything about the two chaps referred to here, but I think this line of questioning barks up the right tree.

I suspect many (not all) truthers see what they're doing almost as a hobby, often at a fanatical level, possibly in the hope of finding a pot of revelationary gold at the end. But that's the point with hobbyists and fanatics, they can't abide the notion of their pursuit ever ending, so they look for and often find ways of continuing what they do ad-nauseum, even if it becomes futile or pointless. I suppose you can call it an obsession, and most of us know where that can lead.

[1337m4n]

Max Photon, Gregory Urich, Russel Pickering, Sizzler, and Dictator Cheney.


Those are the only ones I can think of who demonstrated an interest in learning, gave direct answers to direct quesitons, and didn't resort to calling everyone else "shill" and "sheeple" and "agent".



Honorable mention to Heiwa, RedIbis and JihadJane, who occupy a sort of purgatory between "respectable" and "raving lunatic".

[FineWine]

Max Photon, Gregory Urich, Russel Pickering, Sizzler, and Dictator Cheney.


Those are the only ones I can think of who demonstrated an interest in learning, gave direct answers to direct quesitons, and didn't resort to calling everyone else "shill" and "sheeple" and "agent".



Honorable mention to Heiwa, RedIbis and JihadJane, who occupy a sort of purgatory between "respectable" and "raving lunatic".


Say WHAT????

[T.A.M.]

Max Photon, Gregory Urich, Russel Pickering, Sizzler, and Dictator Cheney.


Those are the only ones I can think of who demonstrated an interest in learning, gave direct answers to direct quesitons, and didn't resort to calling everyone else "shill" and "sheeple" and "agent".



Honorable mention to Heiwa, RedIbis and JihadJane, who occupy a sort of purgatory between "respectable" and "raving lunatic".

really? I have had DC on ignore for a while now. Has he become reasonable and sensible since then?

TAM:)

[Luntoc]

I never have because everytime I debunk someone on the web they call me a liar, bush lover, shill, nwo agent, and I forget some of the other names. That is not the way you debate.

[TheDaver]

I never have because everytime I debunk someone on the web they call me a liar, bush lover, shill, nwo agent, and I forget some of the other names. That is not the way you debate.
Same. And they block you from their YouTube videos and ban you from their little forums on top of that, I bet.

Truthers are disgusting little creatures. It’s almost as if they don’t care one whit for the truth, they just have this sick compulsion to make themselves look like absolute fools and tick people off.

The only time and place I might respect one is at a funeral, assuming the only Truther there is the one in the casket.

[1337m4n]

really? I have had DC on ignore for a while now. Has he become reasonable and sensible since then?

Surprisingly so.

But I may be more forgiving than other debunkers, so your mileage may vary.

[BigBird]

No.

[Luntoc]

Same. And they block you from their YouTube videos and ban you from their little forums on top of that, I bet.

Truthers are disgusting little creatures. It’s almost as if they don’t care one whit for the truth, they just have this sick compulsion to make themselves look like absolute fools and tick people off.

The only time and place I might respect one is at a funeral, assuming the only Truther there is the one in the casket.

Funny you mention that cause I got banned from the prison planet forums about 3 weeks ago. I noticed there weren't any debunkers. But now I know why.

[The Platypus]

Simple answer.

No. I don't respect 911 cults or their minions. They are not worthy of respect.

[TheDaver]

Funny you mention that cause I got banned from the prison planet forums about 3 weeks ago. I noticed there weren't any debunkers. But now I know why.
Never been there myself. Then again it isn’t unique to PrisonPlanet. When I dared to inject a few facts into a discussion at AboveTopSecret, I was met with personal attacks and death threats. And of course the moderators in these places aren’t any help. They’re just as far off their rockers as the members. And conspiracy theory forums are businesses – debunkers are bad for business. So what do you do in the face of criminal activity on your forum? Suspend the aggressor and contact the authorities? Nah, sweep it under the rug and ban the debunker. Wearing a dress like that, he was asking for it anyway.

[Bad_Doggie]

Gregory Urich is the only one that is really worth taking the time to read.

The others I have read and I always end up asking myself why?

Woof!