[Merged]Play-by-Play: Debate between Kevin Ryan and Michael Shermer

[ConspiRaider]

On KTLK, 1150 AM in Los Angeles. On the Mark Germain show. Hawking his new book, what else?

Hartmann talking now about Building 7, and he's dancing, because Germain (a skeptic) is asking pointed questions. Hartmann says, no explosives. But then says "Why get rid of the evidence?". "Why wasn't Building 7 in 9/11 Commission Report?" Keeps falling back on: "We don't know anything. Nobody knows anything about this."

By the way, this is what brands Hartmann as woo-woo, more than 9/11:
http://www.amazon.com/Ultimate-Sacrifice-Robert-Kennedy-Murder/dp/0786714417

Ultimate Sacrifice came out only 2 years ago. Conclusion: THE MOB KILLED KENNEDY!!!111one!!11

Apparently John and Robert Kennedy were planning a coup in Cuba for December 1, 1963, right? So apparently the CIA found out, contracted with the Mob to kill Jack, and then threatened Bobby they'd expose the Cuba coup plan if he didn't keep his mouth shut about his brother's assassination. Yup yup. Something along those lines.

Tomorrow is the debate between Kevin Ryan and Michael Shermer on 9/11, starting at 10:00 AM on Hartmann's show, Pacific Standard Time. I'll be providing live play-by-play coverage here, as usual!

[Gravy]

From the Publisher's Weekly review of Ultimate Sacrifice:
Oswald, long a hidden CIA agent, was set up as the patsy, and it had always been Jack Ruby's job to eliminate him if he wasn't killed at the scene of Kennedy's shooting.That's right: these sooper sekrit conspirators let the whole plot hinge on...Jack Ruby, who mysteriously died of lung cancer three years later! My laughing dog just had a stroke.

[David Wong]

Certainly no reason to plant Ruby at the exit of the book depository and simply shoot Oswald then (headline: HERO GUNS DOWN JFK ASSASSIN AT SCENE).

No, much better to let Oswald out into the world, to then be taken into custody, so he'll have days to blow the lid off the whole thing before Ruby can get to him.

EDIT:

I think my book (http://www.amazon.com/John-Dies-End-David-Wong/dp/0978970764/permutedpress-20) is outselling his. Eat it, Thom!

Sorry. Carry on.

[ConspiRaider]

Certainly no reason to plant Ruby at the exit of the book depository and simply shoot Oswald then (headline: HERO GUNS DOWN JFK ASSASSIN AT SCENE).

No, much better to let Oswald out into the world, to then be taken into custody, so he'll have days to blow the lid off the whole thing before Ruby can get to him.

EDIT:

I think my book (http://www.amazon.com/John-Dies-End-David-Wong/dp/0978970764/permutedpress-20) is outselling his. Eat it, Thom!

Sorry. Carry on.
Hey DW, I didn't know you wrote a book! Congrats and hope it enrichifies you a bunch!

[Brainster]

Hartmann likes to pretend he's on the fence, but I pointed out just yesterday how he steered Robert Baer into accepting LIHOP as a possibility. It is admittedly hard to tell whether he's just playing the topic because it's interesting or whether he believes it. Certainly a fair number of AA or Nova M hosts have bought into the woo. On our local Nova M station we get a long block of Trooferism, with Jeff Farias followed by Mike Malloy.

[Arkan_Wolfshade]

<lazyAss>
Does KTLK stream over the 'net?
</lazyAss>

[ConspiRaider]

<lazyAss>
Does KTLK stream over the 'net?
</lazyAss>
He's on the Air America network so you may be able to get him here:
http://www.airamerica.com/

That's Thursday, November 8th, 2007 from 12 noon to 3 PM, Eastern Standard Time. Of course 9 AM to Noon, Pacific Standard Time.

The Ryan vs. Shermer debate on 9/11 is apparently to start at the top of the 2nd hour in his show.

[ConspiRaider]

Hartmann likes to pretend he's on the fence, but I pointed out just yesterday how he steered Robert Baer into accepting LIHOP as a possibility. It is admittedly hard to tell whether he's just playing the topic because it's interesting or whether he believes it. Certainly a fair number of AA or Nova M hosts have bought into the woo. On our local Nova M station we get a long block of Trooferism, with Jeff Farias followed by Mike Malloy.
Yep.

I was just listening to Randi Rhodes over there in NYC today, and all of a sudden she starts going on about the Arlen Specter "magic bullet" that stopped and turned and reversed and did a right turn and blah blah blah...

I want to take these progressive talk show hosts, sit them down and quite forcefully tell them that their woo-ness undercuts all the good stuff they are doing. But they wouldn't listen. They're being intellectually lazy - reaching out for ANYTHING that can be construed as anti-right-wing, anti-Bush. They cannot see how counterproductive this behavior is.

Ed Schultz is the only one who won't go the woo-woo route.

[Hyperviolet]

Certainly no reason to plant Ruby at the exit of the book depository and simply shoot Oswald then (headline: HERO GUNS DOWN JFK ASSASSIN AT SCENE).

No, much better to let Oswald out into the world, to then be taken into custody, so he'll have days to blow the lid off the whole thing before Ruby can get to him.

EDIT:

I think my book (http://www.amazon.com/John-Dies-End-David-Wong/dp/0978970764/permutedpress-20) is outselling his. Eat it, Thom!

Sorry. Carry on.


Wow. Your book certainly is popular. Virtually all the reviews are 5 stars and dripping with praise.

Well done.
I might have to pick this up.

[BenBurch]

On KTLK, 1150 AM in Los Angeles. On the Mark Germain show. Hawking his new book, what else?

Hartmann talking now about Building 7, and he's dancing, because Germain (a skeptic) is asking pointed questions. Hartmann says, no explosives. But then says "Why get rid of the evidence?". "Why wasn't Building 7 in 9/11 Commission Report?" Keeps falling back on: "We don't know anything. Nobody knows anything about this."

By the way, this is what brands Hartmann as woo-woo, more than 9/11:
http://www.amazon.com/Ultimate-Sacrifice-Robert-Kennedy-Murder/dp/0786714417

Ultimate Sacrifice came out only 2 years ago. Conclusion: THE MOB KILLED KENNEDY!!!111one!!11

Apparently John and Robert Kennedy were planning a coup in Cuba for December 1, 1963, right? So apparently the CIA found out, contracted with the Mob to kill Jack, and then threatened Bobby they'd expose the Cuba coup plan if he didn't keep his mouth shut about his brother's assassination. Yup yup. Something along those lines.

Tomorrow is the debate between Kevin Ryan and Michael Shermer on 9/11, starting at 10:00 AM on Hartmann's show, Pacific Standard Time. I'll be providing live play-by-play coverage here, as usual!

Archive here;

http://www.whiterosesociety.org/content/freehartmann/HartmannShow-(7-11-2007).mp3

Yes, I archive him.

Yes, I like the fellow a lot.

No, I don't endorse his Conspiracy ideas. But I don't think anybody is perfect, myself included.

:)

[ConspiRaider]

Archive here;

http://www.whiterosesociety.org/content/freehartmann/HartmannShow-(7-11-2007).mp3

Yes, I archive him.

Yes, I like the fellow a lot.

No, I don't endorse his Conspiracy ideas. But I don't think anybody is perfect, myself included.

:)
Cool, Ben! And that means anyone who misses the mish-mosh tomorrow will be able to get it from WRS!!

But that is NOT going to stop me from doing my play-by-play coverage right here, whereby I interject my darling but inciteful commentary (darling?) into the live action.

I don't think anyone's perfect either, least of all me. Okay fine - Jessica Alba. But other than her...

[Arkan_Wolfshade]

He's on the Air America network so you may be able to get him here:
http://www.airamerica.com/

That's Thursday, November 8th, 2007 from 12 noon to 3 PM, Eastern Standard Time. Of course 9 AM to Noon, Pacific Standard Time.

The Ryan vs. Shermer debate on 9/11 is apparently to start at the top of the 2nd hour in his show.
Thankee much. I'll roll in to work a little early tomorrow and start streaming it up!

[BenBurch]

Cool, Ben! And that means anyone who misses the mish-mosh tomorrow will be able to get it from WRS!!

But that is NOT going to stop me from doing my play-by-play coverage right here, whereby I interject my darling but inciteful commentary (darling?) into the live action.

I don't think anyone's perfect either, least of all me. Okay fine - Jessica Alba. But other than her...

If you want to do a meta-cast in which you cut in your comments to the archived file, I'll put that online too.

[BenBurch]

Okay fine - Jessica Alba. But other than her...

She probably snores. ;)

[T.A.M.]

Ben, I have a friend who is a truther. I think he is misled, but he is a good guy.

I wonder if Hartmann doesn't fit into the same category, as you seem to think he is a good chum, and you yourself seem like a decent fellow.

TAM:)

[ConspiRaider]

If you want to do a meta-cast in which you cut in your comments to the archived file, I'll put that online too.
I'd have to think about that, Big Ben. I'll be rather caustic, albeit on-the-fly, and naturally I'm looking to cross Ryan's "T"...

[ConspiRaider]

She probably snores. ;)
Please God, give me the opportunity to find out for myself...:)

[Arkan_Wolfshade]

Archive here;

http://www.whiterosesociety.org/content/freehartmann/HartmannShow-(7-11-2007).mp3

Yes, I archive him.

Yes, I like the fellow a lot.

No, I don't endorse his Conspiracy ideas. But I don't think anybody is perfect, myself included.

:)
Can't get the AA stream to work here at work. Subscribed to the podcast, so when it's up...


She probably snores. ;)
I bet it's in that cute way that doesn't keep you from falling asleep. :o

[Brainster]

Are we going to make this the live debate thread? I think the debate is coming on in about 10 minutes.

[ConspiRaider]

Are we going to make this the live debate thread? I think the debate is coming on in about 10 minutes.
No, I was intending to start a new thread, Brain. Getting ready now. I'm just waiting for confirmation from Hartmann himself that he's all set to go...

[ConspiRaider]

About ready to begin on the Thom Hartmann Show, a nationally carried liberal/progressive radio talk show in the USA. Part of the Air America network. I'm listening in Los Angeles on KTLK, 1150 AM.

LET'S GET READY TO RUMBLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLE!

Please do not think that only little ME can make comments while this is ensuing. Everyone: HAVE AT IT!

[Brainster]

First mistake, Ryan did not work for UL but a UL subsidiary.

[Lurker]

Um, it has been 10 minutes. Why no update?

[Brainster]

Ryan leads with the "official story is a conspiracy theory". He also tries to straddle the fence between LIHOP and MIHOP.

[Mr.Herbert]

Is this on the internet anywhere??

[Brainster]

Ryan follows up with the LIHOPPY story about the ISI.

[chipmunk stew]

Is this on the internet anywhere??
http://www.airamerica.com/listen/

[ConspiRaider]

Here we go!

Hartmann asking What Actually Happened on 9/11?

Hartmann starting on his book Ultimate Sacrifice, 17 years in the writing, 840 page book: He actually thinks he figured out the JFK assassination! The MOB did it, naturally. So, we know Hartmann is no stranger to CTism.

Shermer just introduced.

Ryan introduced.

Ryan to talk first. Trying to redefine "conspiracy" theory, because 9/11 wasn't done by one person. Sheez. Really didn't say much. Dancing. Talking about an "initial coverup".

Shermer response. Good points that Al Qaeda did it. Had precedence in 1993, plus they claimed responsibility. Talking about how it is much more believable of 19 perps, rather than thousands (what we say all the time to twoofers). Talking about how no one spilled the beans. Shermer sounding GOOD! Go Mike!

Hartmann brings up Occam's Razor.

Ryan calls the hijackers "alleged". Says Al Qaeda is product of CIA from Afghanistan ops. Ryan sounds nervous, unsure of himself. This could be a turkey shoot. His voice is shaking. Says Pakistan's ISI is involved in 9/11. Concedes that THE USA MIGHT NOT HAVE BEEN INVOLVED!!!

Shermer surprised at Ryan's easy concession.

Hartmann says Why Should People Be Skeptical of 9/11 Commission Report? Then ducks in, Or Why Not?

* COMMERCIAL BREAK * more to come.

[Brainster]

Listen here (http://www.ktlk.com/main.html).

[WhatWouldZeusDo]

Try cutting and pasting this into Winamp (removing the spaces, of course)

http :// 208.109.219.101:8000 /live

[chipmunk stew]

Ryan follows up with the LIHOPPY story about the ISI.
Concedes that ISI involvement would not imply US involvement.

[Brainster]

Only misstep by Michael so far is failing to mention the USS Cole in prior attacks. Looks like my expectation that Ryan would turn out to be a poor debater is proving correct.

[BigAl]

Try streaming on
http://www.wwrl1600.com/live_stream.asp

It's working for me, right now. I find AAR's won stream gets caught up in my PC security.

[WhatWouldZeusDo]

Hartmann's intro of Ryan coming out of the break has shown his hand as something other than agnostic.

[Brainster]

Hartmann helps out with a blizzard of "woo", followed by Ryan's own blizzard. Shermer would need an hour to go through all this crappola.

[ConspiRaider]

And now back to the show...

Hartmann wants to get to the meat and potatoes. Yes, we want that. Ryan to talk.

Says 9/11 Commission left out a bunch of facts. Brings up Bush's relatives being in charge of security. Oh lordy. Ryan sounds NERVOUS!!! Voice still shaking. Says evidence shows government agencies involved, including ROVE!!! Says everyone "conveniently" out to lunch while attacks going on, everybody incompetent. Brings up My Pet Goat.

Shermer talks about 2200 videos available on collapses of buildings. From bottom UP. Not top DOWN, as in WTCs. Really ripping the CD stuff, go MIKE!!!

Ryan dancing AGAIN! Not really saying anything! Ryan defending that there are examples of buildings being demolished from the top down!!! Oh, of course!

* COMMERCIAL BREAK * more to come

[Brainster]

Excellent, Shermer hits the "impact down" versus bottom down. Ryan ducks the "how many people it would take?" question.

Taking phone calls? Cripes, there's not enough time!

[Brainster]

One suggestion for Michael; why not highlight all the "imcompetence" arguments that Ryan has made, and ask the Air America audience and Hartmann if they find incompetence such an unbelievable notion. (Know which arguments will sway your audience!)

[Brainster]

Agggh! Not a good idea to talk about the 8/6/01 PDB, the Air America audience wants to believe that Bush had solid warnings.

[Mancman]

Kevin Ryan is just repeating old crap. He has nothing to offer the debate.

[Unsecured Coins]

anothr 6.5 second free fall claim

[JamesB]

Quote of the day from Ryan:

"No building has ever collapsed from fire before or after 9/11".

[Matthew Best]

Wow. Listening to American radio is annoying - it's about half and half content and ads or promo spots for other stupid-sounding radio shows. I don't know how you guys stand it.

[Brainster]

WTC-7: Probability nonsense. 6.5 seconds, own footprint. "They needed people to be in front of the TV."

[CptColumbo]

Wow. Listening to American radio is annoying - it's about half and half content and ads or promo spots for other stupid-sounding radio shows. I don't know how you guys stand it.NPR, then you only have pledge drives once in a while.

[Unsecured Coins]

North tower did not collapse at the impact point.

[Mancman]

Ryan repeats false antenna drop on WTC1.

What a moron.

[Brainster]

"The hijackers got lucky at every single turn."

Ryan falls into the CT trap of thinking that everything that happened was supposed to happen, apparently forgetting about Flight 93.

Standdown--how about mentioning how many people would have to be in on that?

[JamesB]

There is no restricted airspace over the Pentagon! Ack, where do these people come up with this crap?

[ConspiRaider]

Okie doke, back to the show...

Shermer on collapses. Talks about hindsight, brings up Pearl Harbor conspiracies. Talks about August 6 memo, how it really is not significant. Yep, that's right on! Point being, easy to make connections AFTER the fact.

Ryan on Building 7, collapsed in 6.5 seconds, into its own footprint. Oh brother. Same old crap. No building ever collapsed due to fire. Probablility of 3 buildings all collapsing due to fire on same day. Chrissakes.

Hartmann asks, why put in explosives? Planes are enough.

Ryan bringing up DRG. False flag event, psychological event. Needed people to be in front of TV, finally gets to "rigged for demolition". He's sounding like a LOON! Ahahahaha! Bouncing all over. Apparently, had to get all Americans glued to TV, to TERRORIZE THEM with the CDs. Loon!!! Idiot!!!

Shermer says can criticize Bush Admin, why do we need 9/11 CTism?

Hartmann says Security Stood Down.

Ryan saying buildings did not collapse at impact zone. Saying buildings collapsed all over.

Shermer asks: Why are "they", who did this??? Brings up Val Plame writing book, where are the 9/11 "I Did It" books? Shermer says: NO EVIDENCE OF CD.

Ryan talks about Landmark Hotel. Says 1300 pounds of explosives could have done it.

Shermer says, where evidence?

Ryan says evidence is HOW they collapsed, dontcha SEE??? That's all that is needed, nothing else!

Shermer says Bldg 7 started collapse at debris damage point.

Ryan says 7 collapsed "perfectly", straight down. What a fool. No - it didn't!

Hartmann positing why WTCs did not go horizontal, to kill more people?

Ryan doesn't know, says nothing needs to be proven!!! What a blithering idiot! Just ask questions!!!

P56B project name, says Ryan. B.S. about most heavily defended area at Pentagon. Makes stupid claims about Pentagon, then saved by the bell.

* COMMERCIAL BREAK * more to come

[chipmunk stew]

Hartmann is favoring Ryan. Shermer is losing.

[Mancman]

I want home delivery of the New York Times.

Ryan is not good at this. He brushes off the 'why did they collapse from the impact point' question with 'it doesn't matter, they were rigged for demolition', which makes no sense.

[Par]

Direct Windows Media stream:

http://winmedia.voxcdn.net/aar?MSWMExt=.asf

[Brainster]

Hartmann claims that Osama is not on the most wanted list. Wrong! The claim is that there's no mention of 9-11 on Osama's wanted list poster.

[chipmunk stew]

Ryan is not good at this.
I disagree. I think he's infected a few brains today.

[chipmunk stew]

"...compartmentalized..."
:dl:

[chipmunk stew]

"The 9/11 Commission isn't even dealing with Al-Qaeda"

...HUH?!?

[Brainster]

Poor response on the Put Options. That should be a slam dunk for anybody, cite that the Put Options on United were bought by somebody who simultaneously bought American Airlines stock.

Ryan blows it by saying that everybody should accept the CT. Big mistake, he should have closed with "need a new investigation". That sounds much more reasonable.

[ConspiRaider]

Well, final segment, apparently...

Hartmann asks Shermer why Osama not on FBI list?

Shermer handles well.

Hartmann bringing up Afghanistan pipeline, see? Woo. Hartmann is a woo, but cautious. Now asks Ryan, how FEW could have pulled off this conspiracy? Oh, this should be good. C'mon, Kev!

Ryan says "relatively" small group. Then does NOT answer! Brings up whistleblowers! Brings up Sibel Edmonds! What?!? Who cares about her? So many whistleblowers, says Krazy Kev. Bush Admin of course ignored them ALL. Right, Kev.

Hartmann, you can tell, thinks Bush did this to do the Iraq War. Sheez.

Ryan whining about "conspiracy theory" being derogatory. Poor baby. Whine on.

Ryan says evidence on hand requires us to accept "alternative" theory.

Shermer says Al Qaeda did it.

WELL!

Show's over! Lively. Hartmann conducted a good show, kept it interesting.

SHERMER WINS! Ryan was a bit less nervous as the show progressed, but he was never able to avoid sounding like a desperate man trying to land SOME kind of punch. He bounced all over, avoided answering point blank questions.

Michael Shermer prevailed. And I think we do have to thank Thom Hartmann for conducting a well-structured debate. Hartmann did well to let the two guys have at it, in a relatively calm, measured manner. Good for you, Thom!

[Mangoose]

I missed the first hour....are the guests still there?

[Brainster]

Afterthoughts:

Shermer did a very good job. Not perfect, but very good. He needs to think a little harder about his audience and tailor his responses based on that. This was not a History Channel audience, this was an Air America audience.

Ryan was miserable, repeating the usual talking points. That said, it is quite possible that some were swayed.

Dealing with the blizzard of "facts". Having had to go through this a couple times myself, I have an idea. If you're debating one of the Truthers, have a checklist in front of yourself so you can tick off the bits of woo that they're spewing at you. That way, when it's your turn you aren't trying to remember all the things they said while simultaneously debunking. That is, under the general heading of "WTC-7" you could have the following:

1. Not hit by a plane.
2. Steel-framed buildings never collapse.
3. 6.5 seconds.
4. Own footprint.
5. Limited fires.
6. Countdown.

etc. I don't think any of us would have any problem debunking any of those individual points, the key is remembering them all while you're trying to respond.

[Mangoose]

I hope there will be audio available of the debate....

[Brainster]

Hartmann engages in quite a bit of woo with the "I don't believe in the CTs" callers. Steel shipped to Korea? Nope.

[Mangoose]

Abby: "....thermate dripping out of the tower before it collapsed....Steven Jones found the thermate"

Agh, she's listing out all the taking points ....

"the videos of the collapses are the evidence....all the towers came down the exact way". No they didn't.

Hartman: And I don't disagree.

[Brainster]

LOL! Crockett Grabbe misses his chance to talk!

[ConspiRaider]

Callers:

1. Pro Ryan. Says Ryan was so good. What? Was he listening?

2. Pro Twoofer. Missing videos at Pentagon.

3. Non Twoofer: HARTMANN WON'T LET HIM TALK! OVERRIDES THE CALLER. Caller says Bush took advantage only, no pre-planning.

4. Pro Twoofer: All steel shipped off. Hartmann agrees.

5. Pro Twoofer: Molten metal, thermate, Jonesy brought up. Trying to bring up EVERYTHING in 30 seconds. Reading from script. Hartmann lets HER talk because she is woo, like him.

6. Pro Twoofer: Videos of buildings is the evidence, all that is needed. Slams Shermer. Hartmann supports.

7. Pro Twoofer: Bill Maher infiltrator, giving web site, looking for cheap exposure. Hartmann wishes her the best, approves.

8. Pro Twoofer: Ownership of WTC. Brings up insurance.

Hartmann is absolutely a 9/11 twoofer, despite his claim that he is on the fence. No - he is NOT. All of the above callers who were PRO TWOOFER, Hartmann let them talk, essentially uninterrupted. The one who got through and was a NON TWOOFER? Hartmann stepped all over him.

[BigAl]

As one who had forwarded Thomm's requests for a debate to this group, I am completely disappointed in the way he ran it. I posted a message to that effect in his chat group. He has listener call-ins in the third hour and so far they are all parroting Twoofer talking points. I think it's over and not one Truther called got on air, if they didn't leave out of disgust.

If you are so motivated, you can leave a comment via this URL.

http://www.airamerica.com/thomhartmannpage/feedback

In the past , I have asked for citations for claims made on-air and gotten fact-based answers back. I believe he will see the messages.

I posted on the chat board a statement that Shermer was able to respond to only one point after Thomm plus Ryan had spouted 10.

[BenBurch]

Wow. Listening to American radio is annoying - it's about half and half content and ads or promo spots for other stupid-sounding radio shows. I don't know how you guys stand it.

It's because they have really BAD marketing people and thus cannot sell ad time.

I tend to listen to the network I actually helped found, Head On Radio Network.

Try the Bob Kincaid show from there.

He is a decent fellow and does NOT think 9/11 was an inside job, though he does think that elements of the government ignored indications that could perhaps have prevented it. But that is incompetence, not conspiracy.

[BigAl]

Afterthoughts:

Shermer did a very good job. Not perfect, but very good. He needs to think a little harder about his audience and tailor his responses based on that. This was not a History Channel audience, this was an Air America audience.


Just to defend the truth, I suggest we work on a response, maybe this list and put a link for a specific answer to each one. I'll cut and paste it on his blog.

[beachnut]

LTLK says they are the "the voice of reason", translates to "the source of woo". Painful stupid stuff as "truth" = "lies" for 9/11 truth, and KTLK.

Hartmann is a truther full of woo.

[Brainster]

Just to defend the truth, I suggest we work on a response, maybe this list and put a link for a specific answer to each one. I'll cut and paste it on his blog.

A list of the actual points Ryan (and Hartmann) raised, or all the possible points? If it's the former, we'll presumably be able to download the MP3 soon and put together a transcript.

[Mr. Skinny]

First off, I didn't hear the callers, except for the last one.

However, If I were someone unfamiliar with this topic. I would say that Kevin Ryan came out on top. He managed to hold the microphone for the greatest amount of time throwing out speculation while Shermer sat back listening politely. When Shermer had the mic, he didn't ask for evidence and then doggedly demand that it be presented.

Frankly, I think a show like this is a poor venue for the likes of Shermer. The format is too broken up by commercials; the show is only one hour long, and it's a call in show on top of that; and Shermer is just too polite to jump in a cut off his opponent, thus allowing him to sow too many seeds of doubt while at the same time, not being asked for much in the way of evidence.

[Brainster]

If you want to see a really pathetic attempt to rebunk one of Shermer's solid arguments, check out this ridiculous post (http://www.911blogger.com/node/12438) at 9-11 Blogger. George Washington (real name: Alex Floum) is something of a fathead, but this is doltish even for him. Talking about Top-Down (really Impact Point Down) versus Bottom Down:

While this may be considered demolition from the "top" of the building, if -- instead -- we imagine that the top is comprised of a 30-story high building, the demolition would actually proceed from the bottom of that building.

:rolleyes:

[apathoid]

If you want to see a really pathetic attempt to rebunk one of Shermer's solid arguments, check out this ridiculous post (http://www.911blogger.com/node/12438) at 9-11 Blogger. George Washington (real name: Alex Floum) is something of a fathead, but this is doltish even for him. Talking about Top-Down (really Impact Point Down) versus Bottom Down:



:rolleyes:


Thats the stuff Stundies are made of...

[uk_dave]

If you want to see a really pathetic attempt to rebunk one of Shermer's solid arguments, check out this ridiculous post (http://www.911blogger.com/node/12438) at 9-11 Blogger. George Washington (real name: Alex Floum) is something of a fathead, but this is doltish even for him. Talking about Top-Down (really Impact Point Down) versus Bottom Down:

While this may be considered demolition from the "top" of the building, if -- instead -- we imagine that the top is comprised of a 30-story high building, the demolition would actually proceed from the bottom of that building.


:rolleyes:

oh...oh...ohhhhhh :lolsign::lolsign::lolsign:

ohhh kaaaay

Yes, it ('trutherism') is drugs/mental illness coupled with a pathological need to lie.

[Alferd_Packer]

Well, in a sense that is similer to "crush up"

[BenBurch]

Audio here; http://server6.whiterosesociety.org/content/freehartmann/HartmannShow-(8-11-2007).mp3

[Gravy]

I was going to send Shermer some stuff on Ryan but didn't get around to it. I haven't listened yet (thanks, Ben), but from what I read here it sounds like he didn't need it on the whole. Glad they didn't restrict the topics to collapse issues. Disappointed that Hartmann falls for nonsense that's spouted by incompetents and liars.

[Blackwell]

While this may be considered demolition from the "top" of the building, if -- instead -- we imagine that the top is comprised of a 30-story high building, the demolition would actually proceed from the bottom of that building.

Right. And if we imagine that normal CDs are performed on buildings that are upside down, then all demolitions are top-down!
Or is it top-up?
Wow! Imagining stuff is fun!

I missed the live feed, and haven't been to the site -- is there an Air America forum? I'd be interested in knowing how the response is going there (although I can probably guess.)

[BenBurch]

Thom has a forum on his site; http://thomhartmann.com/

[qarnos]

If you want to see a really pathetic attempt to rebunk one of Shermer's solid arguments, check out this ridiculous post (http://www.911blogger.com/node/12438) at 9-11 Blogger. George Washington (real name: Alex Floum) is something of a fathead, but this is doltish even for him. Talking about Top-Down (really Impact Point Down) versus Bottom Down:



:rolleyes:

Wow!

So, if we redefine the "bottom" of the building to mean the place where the collapse initiated, then the collapse initiated at the bottom.

[CHF]

Sounds like Kevin Ryan just showed everyone why he's terrified of Mark Roberts.

[R.Mackey]

I think we've also settled the question of whether it's worth going on Thom Hartmann's show... his conduct in the telephone session afterward was hardly fair.

It's his perogative -- he's an entertainer, not an educator, scientist, or even someone interested in learning. That's fine. However, there's no reason we need to provide them with entertainment.

The next time someone complains that we're too "chicken" to appear on radio shows, remind them that they are too "chicken" to appear at engineering conferences. That's where science gets done.

My compliments to Shermer, both for taking one for the team and for doing so in enemy territory. He acquitted himself well.

[CHF]

The next time someone complains that we're too "chicken" to appear on radio shows, remind them that they are too "chicken" to appear at engineering conferences. That's where science gets done.

Not to mention too chicken to submit their work for peer-review and too chicken to debate people who they know are well prepared.

[bofors]

First mistake, Ryan did not work for UL but a UL subsidiary.

Oh please, if you can't stick to meaningful points, just don't post.

[bofors]

Only misstep by Michael so far is failing to mention the USS Cole in prior attacks.


Of course... because that would prove the official story about 9/11 is true... whatever...


Looks like my expectation that Ryan would turn out to be a poor debater is proving correct.

If you can't objectively discuss something as simple as a debate, it is little wonder why you don't understand 9/11.

[bofors]

Hartmann helps out with a blizzard of "woo", followed by Ryan's own blizzard. Shermer would need an hour to go through all this crappola.

So, in other words you think that Shermer lost that round?

[AZCat]

Oh please, if you can't stick to meaningful points, just don't post.

Why does this make me think of something about motes and beams?


Oh yeah...

[CHF]

So, in other words you think that Shermer lost that round?

No it means Ryan used the usual twoofer tactic: pile on the spam!

[bofors]

Excellent, Shermer hits the "impact down" versus bottom down.

Oh right... the WTC twin towers couldn't have been demotioned... they went top down not bottum up... for God's sake...

This has got to be the stupidest "debunking" argument in the dumb as a doornail "debunking" bag of crap.

[CHF]

Oh right... the WTC twin towers couldn't have been demotioned... they went top down not bottum up... for God's sake...

This has got to be the stupidest "debunking" argument in the dumb as a doornail "debunking" bag of crap.

Still waiting for that demolition expert, bofors...

[bofors]

Kevin Ryan is just repeating old crap.

... and you still don't get it. http://forum.insanelymac.com/style_emoticons/default/hysterical.gif


Re-read your Membership Agreement, and remember to stay civil and polite.

[bofors]

Quote of the day from Ryan:

"No building has ever collapsed from fire before or after 9/11".

Alright, point conceded... I heard Ryan say that too and obviously he misspoke.

[CptColumbo]

... and you still don't get it. http://forum.insanelymac.com/style_emoticons/default/hysterical.gif

Nice reply, of course some evidence backing up your position would have been better, but that would make you have to think for yourself and do actual research. Not just cut and paste what others tell you is "scientific," and expect those with a background in science to accept it without question.

You're right, I don't get how anyone could still believe the BS that the "Twoof" movement expects reasonable people to swallow.

[AZCat]

You're right, I don't get how anyone could still believe the BS that the "Twoof" movement expects reasonable people to swallow.

I think your problem is with the assumption that they expect "reasonable" people to swallow their BS. Do you really think DRG and the others think they can fool anybody other than the dregs of the intellectual barrel?

[CptColumbo]

I think your problem is with the assumption that they expect "reasonable" people to swallow their BS. Do you really think DRG and the others think they can fool anybody other than the dregs of the intellectual barrel?You're right, I was assuming that they wanted to actually spread the "twoof." They want to create a cult and make money off the less intelligent. But I am also refering to people like bofors, who think that reasonable people should accept the "twoof" without question, because they have. And they couldn't possibly be fooled that easily, could they?

[AZCat]

You're right, I was assuming that they wanted to actually spread the "twoof." They want to create a cult and make money off the less intelligent. But I am also refering to people like bofors, who think that reasonable people should accept the "twoof" without question, because they have. And they couldn't possibly be fooled that easily, could they?

bofors assuming we should swallow the same trash he has accepted without question is like a goat assuming we should swallow the same trash he eats.

[CptColumbo]

bofors assuming we should swallow the same trash he has accepted without question is like a goat assuming we should swallow the same trash he eats.Exactly.

[JamesB]

Alright, point conceded... I heard Ryan say that too and obviously he misspoke.

Did he? It is not the first time a troofer has made that claim, and it certainly won't be the last. Ryan is not only not qualified in any field related to structural engineering, he is not even an academic, even though be pretends to be an editor of a journal. Half of this board has more education than he does.

[LashL]

Audio here; http://server6.whiterosesociety.org/content/freehartmann/HartmannShow-(8-11-2007).mp3 (http://server6.whiterosesociety.org/content/freehartmann/HartmannShow-%288-11-2007%29.mp3)


Can you possibly post the discussion between Shermer and Ryan without all of the prelude, without all of the commercials, and without all of the irrelevant stuff that seems to comprise the entire first 40 percent or more of the audio posted?

(I hate wasting my time wading through a ton of crap to get to the discussion - and although I've finally fast forwarded through the first 40% of prelude crap, it's annoying to have to do so.)

[LashL]

Ryan sounds terrible. Shaky, uncertain, high pitched, crackly voice. That's slightly different than he sounds when he's preaching to the twoofer choir in his little twoofer cocoon world.

It's hard to tell whether he is under the influence of some substance or another, or whether he is just scared.

ETA: As I'm still suffering through a bunch of crappy commercials and nonsense, can someone tell me whether Ryan is ever asked about his ill-begotten lawsuit and its failure?

[LashL]

Following the latest boring commercial break.... is it just me or did someone just apply a filter to Ryan's input in order to minimize the effect of his high pitched whiny voice? Seems that even the tinhat Thom realized how bad he sounds.

(Edit a few minutes later: Ryan still sounds whiny but not as whiny as he did prior to the latest annoying commercial break. Sounds like a filter has been added to get rid of the worst of his whiny, high pitched, shaky voice.)

(Edit a few minutes later: Never mind, if it was a filter, it isn't working very well - Ryan still sounds like a whiny little kid, and a shaky, scared little boy at that.)

*sigh* more commercials

Edit: Oh, the discussion is over. I was not expecting it to end so quickly, since the audio clip indicates that a large percentage of the clip is still to come (my guess is: several more commercials, lots more propaganda, and some call ins from friendlies). It seems that "Thom" is more interested in commercials and tinhattery than actual discussion on the merits. That's unfortunate since willfully blind lack of discussion and the failure and/or inability to think rationally or critically is what feeds the parasitic "truth" movement. The man should be ashamed of himself for being such a putz, and swallowing the tinhat nonsense.

[BigAl]

FWIW, A Twoofer group has their wrap-up of the Hartman show here;

http://www.airamerica.com/thomhartmannpage/node/148#comment

It's mostly content-free attacks on Shermer ("self-absorbed megalomaniac creepozoid").

[negativ]

Wow. Listening to American radio is annoying - it's about half and half content and ads or promo spots for other stupid-sounding radio shows. I don't know how you guys stand it.

"Public radio" (NPR/PRI/PBS etc) isn't bad. I think the commercial radio stations may actually have less than 50% actual programming.

[Brainster]

Ryan sounds terrible. Shaky, uncertain, high pitched, crackly voice. That's slightly different than he sounds when he's preaching to the twoofer choir in his little twoofer cocoon world.

It's hard to tell whether he is under the influence of some substance or another, or whether he is just scared.

ETA: As I'm still suffering through a bunch of crappy commercials and nonsense, can someone tell me whether Ryan is ever asked about his ill-begotten lawsuit and its failure?

No, that was not discussed. You can download a commercial-free version of the debate here (http://www.freefilehosting.ws/file/744/Commercial-Free-Thom-Hartman-911-Debate-Ryan-vs-Shermer-mp3.html).

[R.Mackey]

Well, after listening to that again, I must say I am very unimpressed with Thom Hartmann. I get the distinct impression that he wants very much to pin anything on W, regardless of how true it may be... Airtime for Mr. Ryan far outweighed that for Mr. Shermer, and Hartmann was always there to open as many "possibilities" as he could.

There are plenty of reasons to dislike W without making up new ones. Follow-ups to Politics forum.

Having said that, the Truth Movement cannot "win" a debate, and here's why: We have Mr. Ryan's comments archived. Virtually everything he said is wrong. It is a trivial matter to replay the debate and prove this. Good luck doing that for Mr. Shermer, however, who made virtually no errors that I could detect.

If anyone wants to try to defend Mr. Ryan's comments, you have the floor. I suspect there will be no takers.

[BenBurch]

Oh please, if you can't stick to meaningful points, just don't post.

Actually that IS meaningful given the termination and subsequent lawsuit.

[Brainster]

I think we've also settled the question of whether it's worth going on Thom Hartmann's show... his conduct in the telephone session afterward was hardly fair.

My feeling has always been that it's worth debating where there is a reasonable expectation that there's an audience that has not made up its mind. I'm not going to appear on a "Truther" radio show (not that I'm going to be invited again). But Hartmann? In a Hartbeatt.

[JamesB]

Bizarre post of the day, from the comments on 911 Blogger.

http://911blogger.com/node/12441#comment-168377

I spend some time on the
web site, James Randi.. Which has a huge majority of offical goverment story believers.

They gave the debate nod to Kevin Ryan.

Open discussion like this is great, let's hope to see more of it.
What comments has he been reading?

[BenBurch]

Bizarre post of the day, from the comments on 911 Blogger.

http://911blogger.com/node/12441#comment-168377


What comments has he been reading?

The ones we wrote on Planet X.

[CHF]

Bizarre post of the day, from the comments on 911 Blogger.

http://911blogger.com/node/12441#comment-168377


What comments has he been reading?

Puts the rest of their bizarre interpretations into perspective, dunnit?

[Brainster]

Just for the exercise, I compiled a list of all the conspiracy theory-related claims that Kevin Ryan made (not all wrong of course). I added those made by Hartmann as well. Line breaks indicate where either Shermer was allowed to talk or Hartmann asked a question of Ryan.

Looking over this I'm flabbergasted at the sheer amount of woo the two were able to put out in what amounts to 35 minutes of airtime. One particularly annoying thing that is noticeable in retrospect is that on several occasions after Ryan had spat out ten talking points, Hartmann would jump in, but before cutting to Shermer he'd add another three or four more to the mix, so that Shermer could not even respond to Ryan's claims before answering Hartmann's.

This shows again what we're up against in a debate format. I don't think anybody could substantively debunk 20% of this crap in the time that Shermer had available to him. I did not time it, but I'm reasonably sure that Ryan got far more airtime than Shermer, despite which he frequently interrupted especially near the end, while Shermer did not interrupt once.

Here are the points Ryan raised:

Two hypotheses.
Government story is a conspiracy hypothesis
Either LIHOP or MIHOP=government involvment

Truth is simple but not obvious
Al Qaeda a product of the CIA
Al Qaeda connections to Saudis and ISI
Hijackers have ISI connections
KSM the mastermind
KSM worked for ISI
Sayeed Sheihk 9-11 paymaster and ISI Agent
Musharraf says in book that Sayeed Sheihk an MI6 agent
Sayeed Sheihk reportedly wired $100,000 to Atta just before 9-11 attacks at direction of ISI chief Ahmed.

Hartmann:

What’s wrong with 9-11 commission
WTC-7 controlled demolition
Where are pentagon videos
Smuggled away evidence
Rudy Giuliani suspended rescue operation after gold recovered

Ryan:
9-11 Commission left a lot of information out of report
Commission had conflicts of interest
Uncritically accepted accounts from government sources
Zelikow a Bush insider
No mention of WTC 7
WTC 7 collapsed despite not being hit by a plane
Bush’s relatives in charge of security company for the WTC, United and Dulles
Wirt Walker Bush’s cousin
Lot of FBI agents who claim to have known the dates (sic) and the targets well in advance.
US military allowed Osama bin Laden to escape
Bush and Bin Laden families are business partners

Hartmann:

Bush Sr. having breakfast with Osama’s brother on morning of 9-11 (claims in NY Times)

Ryan:

Government agencies involved hypothesis has better evidence

Hartmann:

What about rogue agents ala E. Howard Hunt

Ryan:

Everybody in chain of command mysteriously absent or incompetent that day
Bush reading My Pet Goat
Rumsfeld didn’t “enter chain of command until events were over”
JCOS Henry Shelton was flying to London, replacement was in a meeting
Montague Winfield MCC (?) asked his deputy to take over for “just the two hours”
Captain Lydeck (sp?) who replaced him turned out to be incompetent
NORAD’s General Eberhart was driving around on Cheyenne Mountain

Not thousands of operatives needed
Let’s not speculate on number needed
There are top down demolitions

Building 7 not hit by a plane
Collapsed in 6.5 seconds
Freefall speed
Into its own footprint
Six years later still waiting for an official explanation
2002 FEMA “low probability” explanation
No building has ever collapsed from fire before or after 9-11
No building exhibiting all the features of demolition has ever not been a demolition
Probability says that the only three buildings collapsing from a fire on the same day is infinitesimal
9-11 Commission didn’t mention WTC 7

Whoever controls the world’s oil controls the world
Not just another “false-flag” event like the Gulf of Tonkin
Psychological operation
Needed people in front of the TV (when buildings collapsed)
Doesn’t matter where the buildings are hit; they’re rigged for demolition
More psychological effect if you wait until everybody’s in front of the TV
Psychological effect drives 9-11 Wars
Effective standdown of air defenses
Hijackers “allowed” to get lucky at every single turn
Government more able to plant the explosives

Hartmann:

What about the standdown
What about ignoring the warnings

Ryan:
Antenna on North Tower drops first
Could only happen if all the core failed first
South Tower large upper section starts to tilt over
Kinks all along top of South Tower, so it fails in multiple spots even away from the fire
Even if it collapses at point of impact if the buildings are rigged for demolition what does it matter?

60 tons of explosives not required
Landmark hotel brought down with 450 pounds of explosives
Landmark Hotel 30 stories tall
Equates to 1300 pounds of explosives for WTC (each tower presumably)
30 trips (10 people three trips)

Sudden onset of collapse
Symmetrical and vertical (!) fall
Near freefall speed
These can’t happen in a fire-induced collapse
Government has failed to prove the fire-induced collapse
Government has proved it wrong through contradiction
Only thing left is demolition hypothesis which government has not looked at

Government has no photos of south side of WTC 7
WTC 7 collapses more perfectly that a perfect demolition
WTC 7 comes straight down
WTC 7 comes uniformly down
Doesn’t lean towards any damage

Airspace over Washington restricted.
Airspace most heavily defended on planet
Airspace named P56B
3-mile restricted space over White House Capitol and Pentagon
Mineta testimony
Clear that “we” had notice that the Pentagon was going to be struck

Hartmann:
Why is Osama not on the FBI’s Most Wanted List
Why has he never been charged with the 9-11 attacks
Can argue that Afghanistan war over pipeline

Ryan
Could have been a small group
Military operation, compartmentalized
He’s not an expert (no fooling)
Lot of whistleblowers related to 9-11
FBI agents trying to contact John Ashcroft for six weeks before 9-11 to give him exact details and he wouldn’t return their calls
Sibel Edmonds says they haven’t even “mentioned” anybody connected to 9-11 at a mid or higher level
Patty Casazza says whistleblowers told her the government knew the day, the type of attack and the targets.
WTC 7 a lot of people don’t know about

Hartmann:

What about the put options
Whistleblowers,
Over 50 specific warnings to the Bush adminstration
Worked out well for Bush Administration, they got their wars
Halliburton Stock four times what it was
Dick Cheney has made millions and millions of dollars
The Bush family and Bechtel has made billions of dollars

Ryan:

Conspiracy theory term is derogatory
Much easier for the government to have accomplished 9-11 than 19 “fellas”

Evidence on hand points to need to accept the “alternative hypothesis”

[LashL]

Nice summary, Brainster.