The Second Roberts-Fetzer Debate

[pomeroo]

From Gary Popkin, producer of 'Hardfire':

Google Video has processed the second program and it
is available at http://tinyurl.com/32hx6g (http://tinyurl.com/32hx6g)

[~enigma~]

What are the three links over at LCF?

[Par]

The bit where Fetzer was trying to use data from the black-box found at the pentagon to show that no plane hit the pentagon was stellar.

[jsiv]

Wow. Just wow.

Did you really spend an hour and a half in the same room as him without passing out from IQ loss?

[~enigma~]

Wow. Just wow.

Did you really spend an hour and a half in the same room as him without passing out from IQ loss?
I gotta say that the face of surprise on uncle Fester in #2 was classic. BTW, I loved when Gravy told him that he can let go now :)

[T.A.M.]

I loveit at 11:40. Mark brings out the passenger manifests, much to Fetzers dismay. Fetzer then, as usual, tries to do the old switcheroo...

Mark: " I have them right here" (the manifests)
Fetzer: "Saddam had nothing to do with 9/11"

Internet Audience....laughing.

TAM:)

[T.A.M.]

Mark...classic example of what happens to Fetzer when you actually make him stay on a point for more than 30 seconds is when you cornered him on Hanjours pilots licence...I have never seen him stagger and stumble for his words so much.

TAM:)

[JamesB]

My favorite Gravy quote, referring to David Ray Griffen, "He is a scholar who gets everything wrong."

[T.A.M.]

Much better...part 2. Mark actually got to speak.

In the end, it shows that with people like Fetzer, you will never convince because anything that is proof of the official story is automatically "fabricated" and "planted".

TAM:)

[Unfit4Command]

I like at 11:07 when Fetzer said "Mark, enough" *puts hand on Gravy's shoulder*

I'm still watching it now, great job so far Mark!

[Par]

In the end, it shows that with people like Fetzer, you will never convince because anything that is proof of the official story is automatically "fabricated" and "planted".

Indeed. He simply holds the idea that there was a conspiracy as an a priori belief. He makes that more than clear on a number of occasions.

[Unfit4Command]

"Mark, they can't have seen things that didn't happen."

Classic. Fetzer seems to have come pretty unprepared, or at least seems to have come without evidence. He has the same exact mindset as a few semi-truthers I've debated at school about the Pentagon.
Him: "It was a missile"
me: "No it wasn't, here are several quotes of people who saw the plane strike, here's aircraft debris, here are some scorched bodies from the plane, here's an article saying that all except for one passenger had been positively identified."
Him: "It was a missile."

etc...we all know how it goes.

-edit-

lmao! FINALLY! Mark said "You can let go now" to Fetzer when he kept putting his hand on Mark's shoulder. It looked like a fist fight was about to break out for a second there. :)

[CHF]

Mark nails him on the manifests and Fetzer jumps over to the hijacker flight skills.

Nail him on the flight skills and he talks about Flight 77's blackbox.

[Pardalis]

I've noticed in the credits someone credited for "robotics".

:boxedin:

[R.Mackey]

Wow!

Mr. Fetzer, if you're reading, I'd like to have a chat with your "aeronautical engineer" who claims a 757 at that speed couldn't descend below 60 feet, even if flat and level. In particular, I'd like to ask him just where the hell he went to school... :D

Another lying Scholar bites the dust, and we haven't even watched Part III yet.

[~enigma~]

Wow!

Mr. Fetzer, if you're reading, I'd like to have a chat with your "aeronautical engineer" who claims a 757 at that speed couldn't descend below 60 feet, even if flat and level. In particular, I'd like to ask him just where the hell he went to school... :D

Another lying Scholar bites the dust, and we haven't even watched Part III yet.
You think uncle Fester claims all the video of the airport landings at St. Maarten were faked?

k53tMD43PDA

[Brainster]

Lyte Trip needs to talk to Uncle Fetzer; he's got witnesses who saw the plane fly over the building.

[CurtC]

You think uncle Fester claims all the video of the airport landings at St. Maarten were faked?
Was that girl on the beach, in the checkerboard bikini, flashing the plane as it passed?

But he did say "at that speed," and 500 mph is way faster than the approach speed (less than 200 mph). Not that it makes a difference, a 757 could skim the ground just fine at 500 mph. It would get a little more lift from the ground effect than it normally would at the same speed and angle of attack, but that's automatically compensated for by the guy with the control yoke.

[pomeroo]

Notice Fetzer's handling of the Osama Conundrum. Smooth, huh?

[Totovader]

Notice Fetzer's handling of the Osama Conundrum. Smooth, huh?

My favorite part is when he starts rocking back and forth as Mark lists off the number of witnesses that directly contradict his claims...

Fetzer just plain lost it- he went on long rants and tried to over-talk everyone and spent a terrible amount of energy dodging the questions. I think we all got a sneak peek into the mind of Fetzer, here- I honestly think that he grinds his way out in his head. Sometimes I don't know if the conspiracists actually believe this stuff or not- Fetzer, I think, believes it.

[gumboot]

Just at the witness AA77 section... beautiful work Mark, you decimated him... :D

Fetzer sounds pathetic.

-Gumboot

[Hyperviolet]

Well, this section was quite different from the first one. Mr Roberts clearly got the better of Fetzer, and by a long way. The main difference i see this time round was the determination to pin down on specifics.

Side note: Anyone else catch Fetzers' body language... closed arms, leaning back in the chair etc. He seems somewhat uncomfortable or defensive???

[~enigma~]

Well, this section was quite different from the first one. Mr Roberts clearly got the better of Fetzer, and by a long way. The main difference i see this time round was the determination to pin down on specifics.

Side note: Anyone else catch Fetzers' body language... closed arms, leaning back in the chair etc. He seems somewhat uncomfortable or defensive???
And extremely disrespectful. Considering that donations from the Jref forumites are essentially what paid for that idiot to be there you would think he could be just a wee bit more respectful.

[HyJinX]

Do you think that Fetzer got the beter of Mark in the first installment?

[~enigma~]

Do you think that Fetzer got the beter of Mark in the first installment?
Let's just say uncle Fester took all of the rope in the first debate.

[PhantomWolf]

And used it to hang himself in the second.

Sooooo.... basically, no plane hit the Pentagon because there wasn't one, but if there was it flew over the top while a different one fired a missile into the Pentagon and then crashed into it, doing no damage and leaving no parts, but just set fire to a bunch of dumpsters which distracted everyone while people poured out of the Pentagon and placed debris all over the lawn., and anyone that claims to have seen anything else is lying, if they actually exist at all that is because really they are just made up too. Ooooooooookay.... Like that guy isn't out to lunch and he forgot to hang up the back in 30mins sign too.

[parky76]

Fetzer keeps changing topics when he feels cornered. Poor guy.

[~enigma~]

And used it to hang himself in the second.

Sooooo.... basically, no plane hit the Pentagon because there wasn't one, but if there was it flew over the top while a different one fired a missile into the Pentagon and then crashed into it, doing no damage and leaving no parts, but just set fire to a bunch of dumpsters which distracted everyone while people poured out of the Pentagon and placed debris all over the lawn., and anyone that claims to have seen anything else is lying, if they actually exist at all that is because really they are just made up too. Ooooooooookay.... Like that guy isn't out to lunch and he forgot to hang up the back in 30mins sign too.In a nutshell..this is the current uncle Fester version...

[Gravy]

I gotta say that the face of surprise on uncle Fester in #2 was classic. BTW, I loved when Gravy told him that he can let go now :)I contemplated saying, "Feel free to hang on. I know it's a bumpy ride."

I haven't watched the shows yet. Will do so tomorrow. Thanks, Ron!

[PhantomWolf]

In a nutshell..this is the current uncle Fester version...

Hehe, where else would you expect to find a nut. ;)

[~enigma~]

I contemplated saying, "Feel free to hang on. I know it's a bumpy ride."

I haven't watched the shows yet. Will do so tomorrow. Thanks, Ron!
You should have...I would have paid you to tell uncle Fester you feel the same way...maybe you could meet after the show. I would have loved to see him haul ass out of the studio :D

[qarnos]

Just watched this video.

I think I can sum up Fetzer's position on The Pentagon as follows: All your evidence that a 757 hit The Pentagon is wrong because a 757 didn't hit The Pentagon.

Wow. What a 'tard.

[orphia nay]

Good job, Mark and Ron!

Do we have a tally on how many times Fetzer changes the subject in these? He did a biggy in this one with his "the Saddam that was caught was fake" response to "why hasn't the US announced Osama's death to win the election if he's dead according to you?"

His dodgic is astounding. He goes from:

"If there was a plane at the Pentagon," to
"The black box found proves the plane flew over the Pentagon" to
"I believe there was a plane that hit the Pentagon, just not a 757".


What exactly does he believe? I don't think even he knows. He just disagrees with anything supporting the "official story". What a sad, strange man.

[gumboot]

I contemplated saying, "Feel free to hang on. I know it's a bumpy ride."

I haven't watched the shows yet. Will do so tomorrow. Thanks, Ron!


When you were telling him not to interrupt, I almost died laughing. That was hilarious. It honestly had me in mind of a parent telling off a badly behaved child.

-Gumboot

[pagan]

I wonder why you guys almost always debate Fetzer on MSM?

Fetzer is most certainly not a good representant for the truth movement. In fact, many believe him to be a disinfo agent.

Unfortunately, he is not a bad debater. Not having seen the debate I guess that he whipped Gravy butt.

[PhantomWolf]

Not having seen the debate I guess that he whipped Gravy butt.

Pahahahahahahahahahahaha!!! Mr "There wasn't a plane, well maybe there was but it flew over the pentagon while another one hit it and anything you say is a lie" Fetzer????? Mr "Those aren't the airline manifests because they have the hijackers on them and the airline manifests don't"???? Bahahahahahahahahahaha. You should do stand up pagan

[twinstead]

Yea, Pagan, pretty much the only way you could say he 'whipped Gravy butt' is by not watching the debate.

[brodski]

I wonder why you guys almost always debate Fetzer on MSM?

Fetzer is most certainly not a good representant for the truth movement. In fact, many believe him to be a disinfo agent.

Unfortunately, he is not a bad debater. Not having seen the debate I guess that he whipped Gravy butt.

So, who are the good representatives of your movement, and by what process (or processes) do you determine who is and who is not a “dfisnfo agent”, because to my eyes and mind Fetzer is no nuttier than many, many other conspiracy theorists, and much more coherent and rational than some.

[Obviousman]

How big are the downloads? I've only got minimal bandwidth.

[Gravy]

I have Pagan on ignore, but he should be reminded that Ron did 2 shows with Les Jamieson, founder of NY911truth, and we did 2 shows with the Loose Change guys. Along with Fetzer, that's a fair sample of "truth" movement thought.

[ref]

Pagan,

I think Ron and Mark would debate anybody, if those people just had the courage to debate Ron and Mark. Many have declined.

Latest to flee, Kevin Ryan.

[Hyperviolet]

Do you think that Fetzer got the beter of Mark in the first installment?

Sorry HyJinX, was that question to me?
If so : Yes, i thought Fetzer got the better of Mark in the first debate. Let me statethis is purely because Fetzer got about 80% of the time to speak unchallenged to Marks 20%.

The 2nd and 3rd debate showed a change in setup - with the time spread more evenly. In this setting - Mark clearly outclassed him.

But to answer your question : In the first debate, Fetzer had the advantage in my opinion.

[Cl1mh4224rd]

I wonder why you guys almost always debate Fetzer on MSM?
Who else has debated Fetzer?

Fetzer is most certainly not a good representant for the truth movement. In fact, many believe him to be a disinfo agent.
Yeah, yeah... What well-recognized truther isn't a disinfo agent?

Unfortunately, he is not a bad debater. Not having seen the debate I guess that he whipped Gravy butt.
Is this how you've formed your beliefs on 9/11, too; by not looking at any of the relevent evidence?

Besides, you've just demonstrated classic truther mentality. You have a pre-conceived notion about how things worked.

[NeoRicen]

That video is hilarious, Fetzer clearly has some issues.

And anyone who can seriously claim Fetzer is winning these debate CLEARLY has MAJOR issues.

[scissorhands]

A controlled demolition of Fetzer there.
I will happily contribute again to any forthcoming debates with prominent fantasists.
Apart from the entertainment value, I think it is important that this video debate format is used, as many of the bottom feeders in the truth movement seem to find written debate somewhat challenging.
Nice work Ron and Mark.
Who is next in line?

[The Doc]

A controlled demolition of Fetzer there.
I will happily contribute again to any forthcoming debates with prominent fantasists.
Apart from the entertainment value, I think it is important that this video debate format is used, as many of the bottom feeders in the truth movement seem to find written debate somewhat challenging.
Nice work Ron and Mark.
Who is next in line?

Was supposed to be Kevin Ryan but he chickened out.

I'd say Barrett next :p But he'd probably do the same...

How about Steven Jones?

[pagan]

OK, I will take a look at it then...

But, remember we truthers consider Uncle Fetz to be much more dangerous than Gravy.

[The Doc]

OK, I will take a look at it then...

But, remember we truthers consider Uncle Fetz to be much more dangerous than Gravy.

The first debate is made up of Fetzer's beam claims. The second two debates (in which Mark FLATTENS him), Fetzer is debating using conventional truther claims.

Conspiracists can't simply brush this one off saying "Fetzer's theories are insane", due to the fact he makes a lot of the same claims that they do.

[Disbelief]

Side note: Anyone else catch Fetzers' body language... closed arms, leaning back in the chair etc. He seems somewhat uncomfortable or defensive???


The way he was rocking front to back, I thought he was a kid about to pee his pants.

Nice work Gravy. I haven't gotten a chance to see part 3 yet, but I imagine it is more of the same. I was totally disgusted by Fetzer's veiled accusation that all military people blindly follow orders. Truthers seem to forget the part about lawful orders, and it is repulsive that a vet would even suggest they are complicit.

[NickUK]

I would hardly class 'Hardfire' as MSM either, Pagan.

[pagan]

My verdict after seeing the second part.

I'm glad to declare that none won. The host was terrible. So, the first part is about space beams? Sorry, have to skip that, too much for my stomach.

[Mashuna]

OK, I will take a look at it then...

But, remember we truthers consider Uncle Fetz to be much more dangerous than Gravy.

Remember, he is you truthers.

[ref]

That was a knockout. Good job Mark and Ron. Fetzer repeated all the debunked Pentagon stuff. His account held no water. 100-0 for you guys.

[~enigma~]

My verdict after seeing the second part.

I'm glad to declare that none won. The host was terrible. So, the first part is about space beams? Sorry, have to skip that, too much for my stomach.
I really would like to see your reasoning.

[Disbelief]

I really would like to see your reasoning.

He has no reasoning, just like he has no theory.

[~enigma~]

He has no reasoning, just like he has no theory.
True...but I want him to put that in his own words :)

[peteweaver]

James Fetzer appears to be a very arrogant self important man.

[Blackwell]

OK, I will take a look at it then...

But, remember we truthers consider Uncle Fetz to be much more dangerous than Gravy.

The mentally unstable are often seen that way.

[~enigma~]

The mentally unstable are often seen that way.
Did anybody mention the mentally challenged are often very strong :)

[qarnos]

How big are the downloads? I've only got minimal bandwidth.

Each file is a shade under 75Mb.

[Miss Anthrope]

What a joke. Good for you, Gravy. You made sense. This guy, well, the words credible and evidence would never apply to his presentation.

[pomeroo]

I wonder why you guys almost always debate Fetzer on MSM?



We guys are Mark and me.


Fetzer is most certainly not a good representant for the truth movement.


Who is a good representative? Chances are he's already chickened out of a debate.



In fact, many believe him to be a disinfo agent.




The number of actual disinfo agenets remains ZERO. It's just crackpots disagreeing with other crackpots.



Unfortunately, he is not a bad debater. Not having seen the debate I guess that he whipped Gravy butt.



That sounds right. You have never required actual evidence to form an opinion.

[pomeroo]

OK, I will take a look at it then...

But, remember we truthers consider Uncle Fetz to be much more dangerous than Gravy.



We rationalists don't regard "truthers" as very truthful.

[nicepants]

I love watching these debates.

Great job, Mark, you put him in his place several times. Fetzer's only defense seems to be "well your evidence is faked/wrong".

And I loved how the black box, found inside the pentagon, proved that no plane hit the pentagon LOL. I think there's a term for that kind of reasoning, but might as well just call it Fetzerism.

One side note, Ron made a few good points, but I like debates better when the host is not actually taking sides in the debate. It gives the feeling that you're "ganging-up" on the truther. Additionally, with the host not taking sides, I think the position of authority the host has in controlling the debate would be more clear.

The Democracy Now debate between the loose change guys and the Popular Mechanics guys would be a good example.

But I digress. Great job, both of you. I'm looking forward to more of these, they are truly a joy to watch.

It's too bad Kevin Ryan can't take the heat. Any chance of getting Alex Jones on? or is he Kevin-ing out too?

[sivazh]

I'm sorry Jim but simply saying "the evidence is fake" is NOT a good argument. It's a catch all that is easily used, but means nothing.

His arguments about the Pentagon were simply laughable. And, he seems to endorse and embrace every single conspiracy out there. Saddam was killed in an air strike, and one of his body doubles was captured, put on trial and hung? So, what the world saw was a fake Saddam??

Wow.

He has no names, no details for anything, he simply says, "Well, I have this and I know this person, I could have brought this..."

Wow, how sad. I had a little respect for Fetzer going in to this, but not anymore.

[~enigma~]

I'm sorry Jim but simply saying "the evidence is fake" is NOT a good argument. It's a catch all that is easily used, but means nothing.

His arguments about the Pentagon were simply laughable. And, he seems to endorse and embrace every single conspiracy out there. Saddam was killed in an air strike, and one of his body doubles was captured, put on trial and hung? So, what the world saw was a fake Saddam??

Wow.

He has no names, no details for anything, he simply says, "Well, I have this and I know this person, I could have brought this..."

Wow, how sad. I had a little respect for Fetzer going in to this, but not anymore.
Wasn't his "burning dumsters" an original piece of tripe. I never heard anybody ever say that before and i am not the least bit surprised.

[qarnos]

Wasn't his "burning dumsters" an original piece of tripe. I never heard anybody ever say that before and i am not the least bit surprised.

Truther Debate rule #3: If you can't beat 'em with facts, make something up.

[~enigma~]

Truther Debate rule #3: If you can't beat 'em with facts, make something up.
Couldn't he have made something up with a better plot...I mean burning dumsters... :)

[The Great Hairy One]

Just watched the second one in my lunch break.

My verdict - leaning towards Gravy, but Fetzer did win some points.

Again, I think Pomeroo should have backed out a little bit and let Gravy talk. It was obvious that Gravy was very well prepared for any argument Fetzer could raise. I loved how he simply produced the passenger manifests without a blink "Oh, I have them right here". That bit was brilliant.

Fetzer is just too slippery to pin down. He reminds me of a creationist, as they also bounce all over the place, and refuse to concede a point. He would win some points with the viewing public simply because he is using the scattergun approach, and he seems to offer some points which Gravy and Pomeroo do not answer - a common occurrence in these debates, as so many minor points are raised.

I thought Gravy's major win was where Fetzer started going on about how all the eye witnesses at the Pentagon were either lying or conspiracy members themselves. His insistence that the evidence was "wrong" just made him look very foolish. The other major win for Gravy was the pilot's license of one of the terrorists where Fetzer answered "he may have had a piece of paper but couldn't fly a Cesna". That was a pure LOLZ moment.

So I'd say 70 Gravy 30 Fetzer. Not a complete whitewash, but pretty good. Downloading Part 3 now. :)

Cheers,
TGHO

[The Demon's Head]

I especially enjoyed the part how pomeroo explained to Fetzer the Usama conundrum. That was truly enjoyable. Fetzer didn't have a definitive answer to that.

[PhantomWolf]

My verdict after seeing the second part.

I'm glad to declare that none won. The host was terrible. So, the first part is about space beams? Sorry, have to skip that, too much for my stomach.
I really would like to see your reasoning.

It'd likely go like this.

Mark
Making his arguments = 50 points
Shooting down of Fetzer's arguments = 50 points
Supporting offical story = -100 points

Total = 0


Fetzer
Making his arguments = 0 points
Shooting down Mark's points = 0
Not supporting pagan's version of the "truthTM" = 0

Total = 0

Thus a tie.

[Scientologist]

I guess I'm the only one who thinks that this was an incredibly weak debate.

[tacodaemon]

I especially enjoyed the part how pomeroo explained to Fetzer the Usama conundrum. That was truly enjoyable. Fetzer didn't have a definitive answer to that.


If I may quote, "Well, I-I-I-I-I-I don't know if I-I can, I-I-I-I can't r-re-re-re-read the minds of those who were pulling some of these strings, but [insert nonsense about Osama being 'created' by the CIA]"

[Minadin]

I finally got around to watching this, I just haven't had the time recently. But, now I feel bad. I should have sent Pomeroo a case of aspirin instead of donating to fly Mr. Fetzer in; I think it would have been more helpful.

[The Great Hairy One]

I guess I'm the only one who thinks that this was an incredibly weak debate.


Why do you think this?

Cheers,
TGHO

[CptColumbo]

I guess I'm the only one who thinks that this was an incredibly weak debate.
Personally I would love to see a formal debate, but I think few "troowfers" know what one is, and those that do would never participate. It would mean not being able to monopolize the time and having to bring actual evidence.

IMO the 24 hour news channels have ruined the art of debate, with the yelling matches that they now show.

[pgwenthold]

Personally I would love to see a formal debate, but I think few "troowfers" know what one is, and those that do would never participate. It would mean not being able to monopolize the time and having to bring actual evidence.

IMO the 24 hour news channels have ruined the art of debate, with the yelling matches that they now show.

Bah, go back and read about the old Creation/Evolution debates in the 70s, long before the 24 hour news shows. They were just as useless.

It has nothing to do with cable, but everything to do with the fact that this type of "debate" is useless at getting to the heart of anything or to determine true from false.

Debates work in politics, where the goal is to make people like you more than your opponent. Getting to the truth of the matter is not about looking good.