Dr Griffin claims he is ready for debate

[buka001]

Came across this post on LCF -

http://z10.invisionfree.com/Loose_Change_Forum/index.php?showtopic=17189&view=findpost&p=14661212

Apparently Dr Griffin is ready to debate any debunker.

[gumboot]

Came across this post on LCF -

http://z10.invisionfree.com/Loose_Change_Forum/index.php?showtopic=17189&view=findpost&p=14661212

Apparently Dr Griffin is ready to debate any debunker.


I would love to debate Dr Griffin. It wouldn't be fair on him though.

-Gumboot

[bofors]

I would love to debate Dr Griffin. It wouldn't be fair on him though.

-Gumboot

Why don't you try me instead then.

[gumboot]

Why don't you try me instead then.

Ok...

-Gumboot

[gumboot]

Why don't you try me instead then.


If you'd like, create a thread offering up what you feel is the single most important piece of evidence that the official account of 9/11 is false.

-Gumboot

[Spins]

If DRG is now saying he's ready to debate any debunker maybe Ron should try and approach him again with regards to an appearance on Hardfire.

[ref]

I'd like to see him debate any debunker, because any debunker can school him.

I'd suggest Mark. And gumboot has some excellent background on his claims, gained from his Griffin debunking work. Heck, anyone from here suits just fine.

[Hyperviolet]

Yooo Hooo! Oh, Pomeroo!

Ron should arrange a hardfire debate between Griffin and Mark.

[T.A.M.]

Why don't you try me instead then.

another drive by posting...

TAM;)

[T.A.M.]

Look at the quote a little closer...

From LCF:

went to see Dr. Griffin.
He is very articulate and knowledgeable concerning the events of 911. He and his fellow truthers would like to have a debate with any of the debunkers. I would like to see that as well. Fema would look like a bunch of preschoolers - oops sorry preschoolers I didn't mean to insult any of you.
Like he himself said about his non Engineer degree - "I can read".
He takes personal affront as do I at being considered a conspiracist when, in fact, it is they who have attempted to spread the conspiracy - however ludicrous.

1. I suspect he will not debate one on one. I think he is hinting at a rekindling of the old debate suggestion from last year, team versus team.

2. If they stuck to only issues FEMA had knowledge of, I am sure FEMA could hold their own in a debate. Why they think some FEMA scientist or engineer would have details on "foreknowledge" or UA93, is beyond me...

3. Similarly, I would love to see a debate between DRG and Mark, but I can almost guarantee it will not happen.

TAM:)

[Hyperviolet]

another drive by posting...

TAM;)

:D

[Hyperviolet]

Look at the quote a little closer...

From LCF:


1. I suspect he will not debate one on one. I think he is hinting at a rekindling of the old debate suggestion from last year, team versus team.

2. If they stuck to only issues FEMA had knowledge of, I am sure FEMA could hold their own in a debate. Why they think some FEMA scientist or engineer would have details on "foreknowledge" or UA93, is beyond me...

3. Similarly, I would love to see a debate between DRG and Mark, but I can almost guarantee it will not happen.

TAM:)

Hmmm. Not good.
It seems that DRG is willing to debate any debunker, meaning debating NIST or FEMA. Which, of course, would never happen and is a safe challange.

[CHF]

Tell you what, Mr. Griffin: show us that you can handle, say, a NYC tour guide then maybe you can work your way up to NIST, OK?

It's telling that one of the top minds of Twoofer Land has never debated anyone on 9/11!

Even the average single white male twoofer in the street is willing to debate passersby.

[nicepants]

Yooo Hooo! Oh, Pomeroo!

Ron should arrange a hardfire debate between Griffin and Mark.

Griffin will never agree to such a thing:

The rules of twoofer debate:

#1 - Don't debate Mark Roberts
#2 - Quantity, not quality. Say as much as possible, it's not about the quality of the debate, but about how many claims you can make that your opponent doesn't refute.
#3 - Team up. If possible, never go into the debate 1-on-1.
#4 - Any evidence that the debunker presents is faked.
#5 - Laugh at your opponent. It makes you look smarter.
#6 - The debunker is a liar.
-Bermas Correlary - Remind your opponent of this.
#5 - You won. No matter what anyone says, you(the truther) are the winner of the debate. Anyone who says otherwise is a shill.

[pomeroo]

If DRG is now saying he's ready to debate any debunker maybe Ron should try and approach him again with regards to an appearance on Hardfire.


I will, in fact, do just that!

[uruk]

You forgot.:
When you go to a debate as a team, only one of you do the talking while the other goes into a coma.

[CHF]

You forgot.:
When you go to a debate as a team, only one of you do the talking while the other goes into a coma.

I can see it now....

Pinch-hitting for David Ray Griffin will be Jason Bermass who struck out his last time up.

[Arus808]

I will, in fact, do just that!


If it hasn't been stated, Ron, you should invite the inventor of the "voice morphing technology" onto your show to confront DRG face to face about his claims on those airphones.

[nicepants]

If it hasn't been stated, Ron, you should invite the inventor of the "voice morphing technology" onto your show to confront DRG face to face about his claims on those airphones.

Agreed...then the voice morphing technology should be used to call the Alex Jones show using the voice of Dylan Avery to see if it fools him. (or vice versa)

[Gravy]

FEMA? :confused:

[Arus808]

Agreed...then the voice morphing technology should be used to call the Alex Jones show using the voice of Dylan Avery to see if it fools him. (or vice versa)


Or demonstrate it (whatever "it" is) in studio, with DRG trying to imitate the voice of Ron.

[Sabrina]

Griffin will never agree to such a thing:

The rules of twoofer debate:

#1 - Don't debate Mark Roberts
#2 - Quantity, not quality. Say as much as possible, it's not about the quality of the debate, but about how many claims you can make that your opponent doesn't refute.
#3 - Team up. If possible, never go into the debate 1-on-1.
#4 - Any evidence that the debunker presents is faked.
#5 - Laugh at your opponent. It makes you look smarter.
#6 - The debunker is a liar.
-Bermas Correlary - Remind your opponent of this.
#5 - You won. No matter what anyone says, you(the truther) are the winner of the debate. Anyone who says otherwise is a shill.

Numbers 8 thru 42- DON'T DEBATE MARK ROBERTS!!!

:D

[BenBurch]

Heck, even I could school him and I don't have the eidetic memories you folks seem to have.

[gumboot]

Or demonstrate it (whatever "it" is) in studio, with DRG trying to imitate the voice of Ron.


DRG should have to call one of Ron's close friends or family members and try fool them...

God that would be funny.

-Gumboot

[chipmunk stew]

I want to see a Griffin/gumboot debate. Here's why:
http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?t=83058

The kiwi accent and good looks will work in his favor too. :D

I'd contribute to a travel fund, if required...

[T.A.M.]

This will go nowhere. The DRG will call for a debate on their terms (infront of a truther audience), and will settle for no less...mark my words.

TAM:)

[Gravy]

I want to see a Griffin/gumboot debate. Here's why:
http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?t=83058

The kiwi accent and good looks will work in his favor too. :D

I'd contribute to a travel fund, if required...We could call him "The Crock Hunter." He could be the Kiwi Paul Hogan.

I'd like to see Griffin address the points in R. Mackey's paper, in any format. He's probably too busy thinking of ways to reword his previous five books, to come up with another five.

[chipmunk stew]

FEMA? :confused:
Maybe he meant prebunkers?

[fuelair]

This will go nowhere. The DRG will call for a debate on their terms (infront of a truther audience), and will settle for no less...mark my words.

TAM:)
Nothing like an audience that will eat.........up your every............word!! And who will go down on.............the mat for you no matter how stupid you appear.

[Monza]

...#2 - Quantity, not quality. Say as much as possible, it's not about the quality of the debate, but about how many claims you can make that your opponent doesn't refute...


This is the one rule that always makes any debate frustrating. I would love to see a debate between DRG and Mark Roberts. But I would like it to have a very specific topic. It doesn't matter what that topic is, let DRG choose. But the point would be to focus only on the evidence and rebuttals related to that topic because the typical truther tactic is to change subjects when cornered by facts.

[T.A.M.]

Can you imagine if the truthers had to where a device that gave them a shock every time they tried to switch topics...lol

TAM:)

[DarkMagician]

Can you imagine if the truthers had to where a device that gave them a shock every time they tried to switch topics...lol

TAM:)

NO! That's how people get electrical superpowers, and the troothers don't need superpowers.

Then we won't be able to taze them when they act like {rule 10}s.

[OldTigerCub]

Can you imagine if the truthers had to where a device that gave them a shock every time they tried to switch topics...lol

TAM:)

I would immagine one of these would do nicely: :D


http://www.collarclinic.com/Merchant2/graphics/00000001/classic70g2.jpg

[BenBurch]

One of the twoofers on DW challenged me to a debate, and was unwilling to meet my terms;

1. On a national network
2. Live
3. All expenses paid
4. My customary honorarium

They expected me to debate them for free!

I guess they don't really want to debate anything... ;)

[BenBurch]

I would immagine one of these would do nicely: :D


http://www.collarclinic.com/Merchant2/graphics/00000001/classic70g2.jpg

KINKY!

[R.Mackey]

In case anyone's interested, Dr. Griffin e-mailed me the other day, regarding my whitepaper.

No comments on it, though, just wanted the tracked-changes edition.

The paper's been out for almost two months now, and still no errors found (unless I suddenly wake up to find myself in Bizarro World, in which case I might have to take the ravings of Chuck Thurston (http://www.truememes.com/mackey.html) seriously).

If Dr. Griffin can find errors that nobody else has been able to, then I'll be suitably impressed. Somehow I doubt it, though.

[MetalliSociety]

In case anyone's interested, Dr. Griffin e-mailed me the other day, regarding my whitepaper.

No comments on it, though, just wanted the tracked-changes edition.

The paper's been out for almost two months now, and still no errors found (unless I suddenly wake up to find myself in Bizarro World, in which case I might have to take the ravings of Chuck Thurston (http://www.truememes.com/mackey.html) seriously).

If Dr. Griffin can find errors that nobody else has been able to, then I'll be suitably impressed. Somehow I doubt it, though.

I'm sure he'll be more than happy to make something up for attempting to disprove you Mr. Mackey. :D

[boloboffin]

In case anyone's interested, Dr. Griffin e-mailed me the other day, regarding my whitepaper.

No comments on it, though, just wanted the tracked-changes edition.

The paper's been out for almost two months now, and still no errors found (unless I suddenly wake up to find myself in Bizarro World, in which case I might have to take the ravings of Chuck Thurston (http://www.truememes.com/mackey.html) seriously).

If Dr. Griffin can find errors that nobody else has been able to, then I'll be suitably impressed. Somehow I doubt it, though.

Wouldn't it be cool if he issued a reversal? Not that I think it's likely to happen. He seems to have cast his die. But it's possible.

[Slayhamlet]

In case anyone's interested, Dr. Griffin e-mailed me the other day, regarding my whitepaper.

No comments on it, though, just wanted the tracked-changes edition.

The paper's been out for almost two months now, and still no errors found (unless I suddenly wake up to find myself in Bizarro World, in which case I might have to take the ravings of Chuck Thurston (http://www.truememes.com/mackey.html) seriously).

If Dr. Griffin can find errors that nobody else has been able to, then I'll be suitably impressed. Somehow I doubt it, though.

BUT YOU DON"T UNDERSTAND THE RELEVANCE OF ERECTOR SETS!!!11nineeleven1

[Quad4_72]

BRING IT Griffin

[firecoins]

Who is Dr. Griffin? Why is he important? I ask these questions not because I don't know but because he isn't important enough to hold a stage with me.

[chipmunk stew]

BRING IT Griffin
Oh, it's ALREADY been BROUGHTEN!

[pomeroo]

DRG should have to call one of Ron's close friends or family members and try fool them...

God that would be funny.

-Gumboot


A great post! Wouldn't it be amazing if the fantasists--for once!--actually attempted to demonstrate the validity of one of their fabrications?

It will NEVER happen.

[T.A.M.]

Oh, it's ALREADY been BROUGHTEN!

Aren't you suppose to sway your hips and stick the palm of your hand in front of someone's face when you say that?

TAM:)

[gumboot]

Aren't you suppose to sway your hips and stick the palm of your hand in front of someone's face when you say that?

TAM:)

Uh oh sister, don't you even go there!

(Me and my friends used to mock silly Americans on those talk shows that would get really upset with each other and say stuff like "You don't even know what my life is like" or "Don't you even go there" or "Sister you need to do your thing")

-Gumboot

[T.A.M.]

Jerry Springer - Gladiators for the Trailer Park Couch Potato

TAM;)

[Magenta]

Uh oh sister, don't you even go there!

(Me and my friends used to mock silly Americans on those talk shows that would get really upset with each other and say stuff like "You don't even know what my life is like" or "Don't you even go there" or "Sister you need to do your thing")

-Gumboot


Of course, this raises the question of why you were watching American talk shows in the first place. :D

[CptColumbo]

Of course, this raises the question of why you were watching American talk shows in the first place. :DMaybe he doesn't have cable. It's a tough call in the afternoon: TV talk shows vs. Soap Operas vs. Sesame Street. Personally I always go with Sesame Street, just so I can stay hip.

[WilliamSeger]

Who is Dr. Griffin? Why is he important? I ask these questions not because I don't know but because he isn't important enough to hold a stage with me.

Seems to me that when I hear of an apparently intelligent and well educated person who has bought into "movement" BS, there's about a 99% chance they bought it from Griffin. Apparently, he has a knack for convincing some incautious people that he's thoroughly and carefully researched what he's writing about, and that he wouldn't be writing about it if it weren't solid. IMHO, taking on Griffin would be well worth it.

[T.A.M.]

Absolutely. If you go to the PQ911 site, and look up the "professors" that have "questions" about 9/11, an abundance of them are associates of DRGs, or fellow authors and editors.

TAM:)