IS Forum
Forum Index Register Members List Events Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Help

Go Back   International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Conspiracies and Conspiracy Theories » 9/11 Conspiracy Theories
 


Welcome to the International Skeptics Forum, where we discuss skepticism, critical thinking, the paranormal and science in a friendly but lively way. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest, which means you are missing out on discussing matters that are of interest to you. Please consider registering so you can gain full use of the forum features and interact with other Members. Registration is simple, fast and free! Click here to register today.
Reply
Old 27th December 2013, 10:47 PM   #121
Redwood
Graduate Poster
 
Redwood's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 1,557
Originally Posted by jaydeehess View Post
I had a perfect Cribbage hand once. Oh what a feeling!

12,994,800:1 chance of that occurring (I just looked it up)
What are the odds of a 29 and a 28 hand occurring in one game? http://cribbagecorner.com/facts/perfect About one in 9 million. So it should happen in tournament play about once every 1,000 years. The quote didn't specify if this was in a tournament or just a friendly game.
Redwood is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 27th December 2013, 11:19 PM   #122
Robrob
Philosopher
 
Robrob's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Posts: 5,497
Originally Posted by david.watts View Post
What is the plausibility it occurred?
Out of curiosity, which winning lottery number sequence is more plausible:

12-34-56-78-90

Or

73-45-19-24-87
__________________
Mister Earl: "The plural of bollocks is not evidence."
Robrob is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 28th December 2013, 12:33 AM   #123
Craig4
Penultimate Amazing
 
Craig4's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: I live in a swamp
Posts: 27,710
Originally Posted by david.watts View Post
Sorry. Had to leave and took longer than I thought plus had to crash for a bit on the couch.

I am going to take a time out. I may have a different way to go about this that may address things you have said. Let me read the comments I have not seen yet and think about my different possible approach. It is basically not very much different but in a significantly different context.

You have made some very good points. Again, I am now in a time out. Plan to let you know how long it might be when I get an idea.
So we did not have the revelation you were hoping for.
Craig4 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 28th December 2013, 12:57 AM   #124
LSSBB
Devilish Dictionarian
 
LSSBB's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: An elusive house at Bachelors Grove Cemetery
Posts: 20,071
Compare:
The 100% Impossible Inside Job
__________________
"You must not let your need to be right be more important than your need to find out what's true." - Ray Dalio, Principles
LSSBB is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 28th December 2013, 12:59 AM   #125
ozeco41
Philosopher
 
ozeco41's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Moss Vale, NSW, Australia
Posts: 7,617
Originally Posted by Craig4 View Post
So we did not have the revelation you were hoping for.
He has achieved his immediate goal - he has a lot of people discussing "probability" or "chance" or "odds"

..the main problem with that is that it has no relevance to the key aspects of the events of 9/11 - such as "Was there CD?"

The facts of what happened on 9/11 were locked in place in history on 9/11.

What happened then happened then...whether the pre-happening probability was low OR the post happening probability was 100%. What happened is a matter of fact - either way - it is a matter of fact - it is not a matter of probability.

So all the probability discussion has zero relevance to "Was there CD?" And the reigning default hypothesis is "No CD?"

...it will remain the hypothesis until and if someone "proves" otherwise....don't hold your breath waiting.
ozeco41 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 28th December 2013, 03:06 AM   #126
Craig4
Penultimate Amazing
 
Craig4's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: I live in a swamp
Posts: 27,710
It is hard not to notice the ignoring of the elephant in the truther living room. He failed to take into account the infinitely remote chance of rigging the buildings with explosives while occupied, generating holograms, death rays or whatever other damn fool nonsense these people believe this week.
Craig4 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 28th December 2013, 04:33 AM   #127
tsig
a carbon based life-form
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 39,049
Originally Posted by DGM View Post
To that end. The odds that the events of 9/11 would happen were really good. It's hard to put a number on it but, we had gotten so complacent with security that this was inevitable. I'd say the odds of a terrorist attack on the US was near 100%.
You mean another terrorist attack, we forget that there were other attacks before this one so it wasn't unique, it's just that it's magnitude blocks out the others.
tsig is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 28th December 2013, 04:41 AM   #128
tsig
a carbon based life-form
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 39,049
Originally Posted by david.watts View Post
Coincidences and highly unlikely things do happen. But, how unlikely were they? How many very unlikely things happened? How many coincidences are required to explain away many very unlikely things? The answer would be many.

How likely is it that many very unlikely things happened during one event?

I mean, what were the odds that one hijacker's passport would be found AND only one filing cabinet would be found?

I wonder.
What are the odds that the masterminds who did it are so stupid that burger flippers with a net connection could figure it out?
tsig is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 28th December 2013, 08:41 AM   #129
Grizzly Bear
このマスクによっ
 
Grizzly Bear's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 7,866
As they say, hindsight is always 20/20. Probabilities and statistics discussed in the past tense when they've already happened is somewhat of a moot point because the low-odds event has already taken place in spite of the astronomical odds of it happening again in the future. Things do happen against incredible odds. Whether those things are nefarious or not isn't determined by probability though, something I think a lot of conspiracy leaners miss.

If that probability presents a problem to someone then they should be able to follow the chain of evidence and explain why it's suspect... To me, the survival of a passport in a plane crash is immaterial. Ever hear of the flight attendant that survived a 30,000 foot free fall after the plane she was in broke apart in mid air? Pretty unbelievable, but it goes to show that truth is sometimes stranger than fiction.
__________________

Last edited by Grizzly Bear; 28th December 2013 at 08:50 AM.
Grizzly Bear is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 28th December 2013, 09:09 AM   #130
beachnut
Penultimate Amazing
 
beachnut's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Dog House
Posts: 26,122
Originally Posted by Redwood View Post
David, I notice that over the five years you've been a member, most of your posts have come in the last few months, and they're all regarding 9/11. I surmise that something must have "lit a fire" with you. If so, would you care to share it?

http://www.opednews.com/Diary/9-11-H...80324-705.html

He was on fire spreading this nonsense 5 years ago.

Truthiecicada is the genus of the 5-year and 7-year periodical truther of eastern North America. Although they are sometimes called "truthers", this is a misnomer as conspiracy theorist belong to the taxonomic order Zero Evidence, suborder The Big Lie, while truthers belong to Very Dumb Lies.
beachnut is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 28th December 2013, 10:02 AM   #131
LSSBB
Devilish Dictionarian
 
LSSBB's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: An elusive house at Bachelors Grove Cemetery
Posts: 20,071
Originally Posted by Grizzly Bear View Post
As they say, hindsight is always 20/20. Probabilities and statistics discussed in the past tense when they've already happened is somewhat of a moot point because the low-odds event has already taken place in spite of the astronomical odds of it happening again in the future. Things do happen against incredible odds. Whether those things are nefarious or not isn't determined by probability though, something I think a lot of conspiracy leaners miss.

If that probability presents a problem to someone then they should be able to follow the chain of evidence and explain why it's suspect... To me, the survival of a passport in a plane crash is immaterial. Ever hear of the flight attendant that survived a 30,000 foot free fall after the plane she was in broke apart in mid air? Pretty unbelievable, but it goes to show that truth is sometimes stranger than fiction.
To use a quantum mechanics analogy, the wave function has already collapsed, the observation has already been made. Probability is now meaningless.
__________________
"You must not let your need to be right be more important than your need to find out what's true." - Ray Dalio, Principles

Last edited by LSSBB; 28th December 2013 at 10:03 AM.
LSSBB is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 28th December 2013, 10:02 AM   #132
ozeco41
Philosopher
 
ozeco41's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Moss Vale, NSW, Australia
Posts: 7,617
Originally Posted by Grizzly Bear View Post
As they say, hindsight is always 20/20. Probabilities and statistics discussed in the past tense when they've already happened is somewhat of a moot point because the low-odds event has already taken place in spite of the astronomical odds of it happening again in the future. Things do happen against incredible odds. Whether those things are nefarious or not isn't determined by probability though, something I think a lot of conspiracy leaners miss...

This thread is a waste of time ...david should have set up a thread 'Facts about 9/11 which overturn official version facts"


...I suspect it would be a short list of facts.
ozeco41 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 28th December 2013, 10:04 AM   #133
ozeco41
Philosopher
 
ozeco41's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Moss Vale, NSW, Australia
Posts: 7,617
Originally Posted by LSSBB View Post
To use a quantum mechanics analogy, the waveform has already collapsed, the observation has already been made. Probability is now meaningless.
ozeco41 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 28th December 2013, 10:26 AM   #134
Seymour Butz
Muse
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 884
Originally Posted by david.watts View Post
Improbable things regarding 9/11.

What improbable things happened regarding 9/11?

We all understand almost anything is possible, but what are the odds?

On September the 10th, if you tried to come up with the odds that certain things would happen the next day if an attack occurred that involved four hijacked airplanes doing what we saw on 9/11, what things would you include and what do you think the odds would be for that particular thing happening? Also include things that we learned about later; such as what are the odds the drills that were occurring happened to have occurred on the same day, 9/11.

For example, finding an undamaged passport of somebody on one of the planes that hit the Twin Towers, was that improbable? I think it was. How improbable was it do you think? I think that it was much more improbable that it was one of the hijacker’s passports. How much more improbable does that make it? When I say “how improbable” I mean what are the odds. For example was it a one in two possibility? Or a one in ten possibility? What do you think the probability or odds were in finding not just a passport, but a hijacker’s passport? Tell me what you think, was it is one in … what? What in how many?


We all understand almost anything is possible, but what are the odds?
So come up with as many things as you can that the odds of it happening were less than 1 in 2, i.e., fifty - fifty. And state what you think the reasonable odds would have been on the day before 9/11.

Look into flight 1771, a suicide/murder. The plane was deliberately flown into the ground. 43 people died. The plane was in unrecognizable pieces. No bodies were found.

Has some similarities to the 9/11 crashes, eh?

And guess what? They found the hand written suicide note in the wreckage.

Improbable stuff happens, and one shouldn't let their incredulity cause doubt. That is the lesson to be learned......
Seymour Butz is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 28th December 2013, 10:42 AM   #135
alienentity
Illuminator
 
alienentity's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 4,325
Some people just can't fathom that random, improbable things still do happen spontaneously. A great number of these people insist that nature couldn't possibly become so organized simply by random selection, but there must be an invisible 'guiding hand' - ie a creator or intelligent designer.

It's the same process at work with 9/11 - anomalies and strange twists of fate are attributed to an 'intelligent design' secretly at work. In the case of 9/11 it's not 'God' but 'Them™', the invisible conspiracy.

If flight 11 had not crashed into WTC 1, the probability of a hijacker's passport landing on a NYC street would have been exceedingly small; since it did in fact crash there, the probability increased dramatically. There is no requirement of a secret, invisible conspiracy beyond those basic facts to make it happen the way it did. Further, there is zero evidence that any such conspiracy to plant the passport existed.

Did an invisible hand place the passport there? I dunno
Did God cause the 2011 Tsunami which devastated Japan? I dunno
There's zero evidence for either of those theories. That doesn't stop some people from believing the theories anyhow.
__________________
Heiwa - 'Anyone suggesting that part C structure can one-way crush down part A structure is complicit to mass murder!'
000063 - 'Problem with the Truthers' theories is that anyone with enough power to pull it off doesn't need to in the first place.'
mrkinnies 'I'm not a no-planer' 'I don't believe Flight 77 hit the Pentagon'
alienentity is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 28th December 2013, 11:25 AM   #136
OCaptain
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Posts: 1,120
Originally Posted by david.watts View Post
Coincidences and highly unlikely things do happen. But, how unlikely were they? How many very unlikely things happened? How many coincidences are required to explain away many very unlikely things? The answer would be many.

How likely is it that many very unlikely things happened during one event?

I mean, what were the odds that one hijacker's passport would be found AND only one filing cabinet would be found?

I wonder.
So, what?
OCaptain is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 28th December 2013, 12:13 PM   #137
jaydeehess
Penultimate Amazing
 
jaydeehess's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: 40 miles north of the border
Posts: 20,849
Originally Posted by Redwood View Post
Hey! My uncle just finally got one after 60+ years as an avid player.
I was in my twenties at the time but we played two games every lunch hour.
I think it was $5 a game so winner got the pot, four players , I was up $15. Hard to catch someone who scored a 29.

BTW, there are about one million hand combinations that score zero points
jaydeehess is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 28th December 2013, 12:18 PM   #138
jaydeehess
Penultimate Amazing
 
jaydeehess's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: 40 miles north of the border
Posts: 20,849
Originally Posted by Robrob View Post
Out of curiosity, which winning lottery number sequence is more plausible:

12-34-56-78-90

Or

73-45-19-24-87
They'd be equal. The odds of any five numbers out if the total pool of numbers is equal. You did not easy what the lottery draw was, obviously a pick 5 out of 90 or more.
Its the same odds as the combination
1-2-3-4-5
jaydeehess is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 28th December 2013, 12:20 PM   #139
000063
Philosopher
 
000063's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 5,398
Originally Posted by ozeco41 View Post
Seconded.
000063 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 28th December 2013, 12:28 PM   #140
DGM
Skeptic not Atheist
 
DGM's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: West of Northshore MA
Posts: 24,748
David:

Why don't you just cut through the BS and give us this convincing proof of "inside job"?

You said you got it down to 99+%. It's been 12 years, what are you waiting for?
__________________
"Remember that the goal of conspiracy rhetoric is to bog down the discussion, not to make progress toward a solution" Jay Windley

"How many leaves on the seventh branch of the fourth tree?" is meaningless when you are in the wrong forest: ozeco41
DGM is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 28th December 2013, 12:30 PM   #141
Robrob
Philosopher
 
Robrob's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Posts: 5,497
Originally Posted by jaydeehess View Post
They'd be equal. The odds of any five numbers out if the total pool of numbers is equal. You did not easy what the lottery draw was, obviously a pick 5 out of 90 or more.
Its the same odds as the combination
1-2-3-4-5
I was hoping our Truther friend would answer. Obviously the odds are exactly the same but because of our POV we consider 1-2-3-4-5 to somehow be more "unlikely" than a more "random" series. Same with his confirmation bias about passports.

Find a passport = how could they just happen to find it?

Find no passport = no comment at all.
__________________
Mister Earl: "The plural of bollocks is not evidence."
Robrob is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 28th December 2013, 12:47 PM   #142
david.watts
Critical Thinker
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 293
And the best answer is?................................To use a quantum mechanics analogy, the wave function has already collapsed, the observation has already been made. Probability is now meaningless. (LSSBB)

!!!!!!!! Priceless.

Last edited by david.watts; 28th December 2013 at 12:52 PM.
david.watts is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 28th December 2013, 01:09 PM   #143
ozeco41
Philosopher
 
ozeco41's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Moss Vale, NSW, Australia
Posts: 7,617
Originally Posted by david.watts View Post
And the best answer is?................................To use a quantum mechanics analogy, the wave function has already collapsed, the observation has already been made. Probability is now meaningless. (LSSBB)

!!!!!!!! Priceless.
It looks like you don't comprehend how accurate that analogy is.

So in your venture into false use of probabilities you have rejected:
a) Explanations of your errors based on objective reasoning (me and a few others);
b) Multiple anecdotal examples showing your errors (many members have contributed); AND NOW
c) analogy from another field of scientific endeavour.

Time to get out of the dead end track of false application of probability.

Why not do what I and several others have suggested:

Put up the list of facts which you claim outweigh the facts supporting the official narratives.

AND for each one show why your facts outweigh the accepted facts.
ozeco41 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 28th December 2013, 01:24 PM   #144
david.watts
Critical Thinker
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 293
Originally Posted by LSSBB View Post
To use a quantum mechanics analogy, the wave function has already collapsed, the observation has already been made. Probability is now meaningless.
Last night I got back at 02:30 and started reading responses/comments to figure out what the heck is going on here.

(Note: yesterday I did ask for a time out and gave it to myself. And I said, I would update later as to when I would be able to come back with another approach. As I see though, the responses continue to roll in. One more note: When I do not get back for a while or longer it is because I can't. I can't as can not as in, I ain't at my computer. Not by design to stall or irritate, but my situation doesn't allow it. Enough said.)

While reading, it hit me right away that we simply are on different pages. You (JREF) had a number of posts that I should have picked up on as to what is going on. I did not. So, my fault, sorry. But you (the collective) are not blameless.

I got stuck on ozeco's responses about 'pre-probability' and 'post-probability.' Which now knowing what happened, ozeco was 100% right .......... FROM his -- and quite a few other's -- perspective. My perspective: essentially the opposite. Again,I admit there a number of other responses I should have picked up on. But also there were many that were from the same perspective as ozeco's. (That does not seem to make sense because it doesn't; not without context. I will explain.)

So I been thinking that recognition of the other side's perspective went without saying. That is to say, your side = the official story. My side = inside job. (More to come quickly).
david.watts is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 28th December 2013, 01:26 PM   #145
pgimeno
Illuminator
 
pgimeno's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Spain
Posts: 3,692
Originally Posted by david.watts View Post
And the best answer is?................................To use a quantum mechanics analogy, the wave function has already collapsed, the observation has already been made. Probability is now meaningless. (LSSBB)

!!!!!!!! Priceless.
I agree. I found it a superb analogy.
pgimeno is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 28th December 2013, 01:32 PM   #146
DGM
Skeptic not Atheist
 
DGM's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: West of Northshore MA
Posts: 24,748
Originally Posted by david.watts View Post
My side = inside job. (More to come quickly).
Can we expect you to get to this at some point? You said you have the proof. Are you a liar?
__________________
"Remember that the goal of conspiracy rhetoric is to bog down the discussion, not to make progress toward a solution" Jay Windley

"How many leaves on the seventh branch of the fourth tree?" is meaningless when you are in the wrong forest: ozeco41
DGM is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 28th December 2013, 01:35 PM   #147
jaydeehess
Penultimate Amazing
 
jaydeehess's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: 40 miles north of the border
Posts: 20,849
You can take a time out any time you feel like it David. You can post replies whenever you are willing and able. What is very unlikely to happen is for the several posters following this thread to follow your lead as to when to, or not to, post.
jaydeehess is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 28th December 2013, 01:36 PM   #148
jaydeehess
Penultimate Amazing
 
jaydeehess's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: 40 miles north of the border
Posts: 20,849
Originally Posted by pgimeno View Post
I agree. I found it a superb analogy.
Which is why I posted a previous response in terms of probability at time of impact.
jaydeehess is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 28th December 2013, 01:38 PM   #149
DGM
Skeptic not Atheist
 
DGM's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: West of Northshore MA
Posts: 24,748
Originally Posted by ozeco41 View Post

Why not do what I and several others have suggested:

Put up the list of facts which you claim outweigh the facts supporting the official narratives.

AND for each one show why your facts outweigh the accepted facts.
I give this a probability of near 0%.
__________________
"Remember that the goal of conspiracy rhetoric is to bog down the discussion, not to make progress toward a solution" Jay Windley

"How many leaves on the seventh branch of the fourth tree?" is meaningless when you are in the wrong forest: ozeco41
DGM is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 28th December 2013, 01:38 PM   #150
ozeco41
Philosopher
 
ozeco41's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Moss Vale, NSW, Australia
Posts: 7,617
Originally Posted by david.watts View Post
...So I been thinking that recognition of the other side's perspective went without saying...
It should IF the process is intended to be one of reconciling opposing viewpoints.

If I dare to risk a metaphor we need a bridge between our two islands.

I have offered to build a bridge from my island which you decline to take. The alternate therefore is you build the bridge which you are also reluctant to do.

Hence my suggestion simple stated as "drop probability based arguments - let's discuss facts of evidence"

So you still have four options towards progress:
1) Follow through explanations of probability offered by "our side";
2) Put forward your own explanations of probability;
3) Drop probability - which is not the issue anyway - and discuss facts supporting your claims; OR
4) Continue wandering around a miscellaneous collection of disconnected bits with no sense of direction or purpose.

As always ball is in your court.

Play ball!
ozeco41 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 28th December 2013, 01:42 PM   #151
ozeco41
Philosopher
 
ozeco41's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Moss Vale, NSW, Australia
Posts: 7,617
Originally Posted by DGM View Post
I give this a probability of near 0%.
If he does it it will be 100%.


(Note the "If" )

So that sort of proves that you and I comprehend a bit of probability theory.

...and have a cynical opinion about progress of the TOPIC
ozeco41 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 28th December 2013, 01:48 PM   #152
DGM
Skeptic not Atheist
 
DGM's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: West of Northshore MA
Posts: 24,748
Originally Posted by ozeco41 View Post

...and have a cynical opinion about progress of the TOPIC
I'd like for him to say what he expected to achieve by starting this thread.
__________________
"Remember that the goal of conspiracy rhetoric is to bog down the discussion, not to make progress toward a solution" Jay Windley

"How many leaves on the seventh branch of the fourth tree?" is meaningless when you are in the wrong forest: ozeco41
DGM is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 28th December 2013, 01:53 PM   #153
david.watts
Critical Thinker
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 293
(Continued.) Of course it is absurd to talk about about occurrences after the fact. Your perspective: if hijacker's passports found ... they were found. So what. My perspective: if hijacker's passports found ... what were the odds. Your perspective, "what is the point??" My perspective, I have an easier/better explanation. This is where my statement comes from: "So I had been thinking that recognition of the other side's perspective went without saying." Trying to show how improbable 9/11 has no purpose unless I can show the same events that happened on 9/11 can be explained away much more simply and much more probable. And after all that, that is what I am going to try to do.

I rambled in what i was wrote but since we spent so much time seemingly backward to each other I thought it deserved a "explanation." Anyway, I hope you get what I was saying.

I should have said in my opening post that I would provide a simpler explanation. I did not.
david.watts is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 28th December 2013, 01:59 PM   #154
beachnut
Penultimate Amazing
 
beachnut's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Dog House
Posts: 26,122
Originally Posted by david.watts View Post
(Continued.) Of course it is absurd to talk about about occurrences after the fact. Your perspective: if hijacker's passports found ... they were found. So what. My perspective: if hijacker's passports found ... what were the odds. Your perspective, "what is the point??" My perspective, I have an easier/better explanation. This is where my statement comes from: "So I had been thinking that recognition of the other side's perspective went without saying." Trying to show how improbable 9/11 has no purpose unless I can show the same events that happened on 9/11 can be explained away much more simply and much more probable. And after all that, that is what I am going to try to do.

I rambled in what i was wrote but since we spent so much time seemingly backward to each other I thought it deserved a "explanation." Anyway, I hope you get what I was saying.

I should have said in my opening post that I would provide a simpler explanation. I did not.
911 truth does not understand physics. The passport survived due to physics. Low mass, and it was ejected; along with countless other items, found or not found; rings, wallets, etc. Stuff from accidents, and this case murder you make fun of. 911 truth posts nonsense because they can't figure out crash science given 12 years to do the research. 12 years.

5 years ago you made up lies about this event.
http://www.opednews.com/Diary/9-11-H...80324-705.html

When will you retract these silly lies?
beachnut is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 28th December 2013, 02:01 PM   #155
david.watts
Critical Thinker
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 293
As to the wave function, you are are correct. It collapsed. But this is what the whole inside job vs no inside job is all about. What we observe after the collapse -- say it collapsed right after the events of 9/11 -- is not the same. You see a dead cat , we see the cat is alive. But which is it? Hence, we are disputing this.
david.watts is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 28th December 2013, 02:07 PM   #156
DGM
Skeptic not Atheist
 
DGM's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: West of Northshore MA
Posts: 24,748
Originally Posted by david.watts View Post

I should have said in my opening post that I would provide a simpler explanation. I did not.
I tend to believe you can't. You only hope to find one someday.

Am I right? I put the probability at near 100%.
__________________
"Remember that the goal of conspiracy rhetoric is to bog down the discussion, not to make progress toward a solution" Jay Windley

"How many leaves on the seventh branch of the fourth tree?" is meaningless when you are in the wrong forest: ozeco41

Last edited by DGM; 28th December 2013 at 02:13 PM.
DGM is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 28th December 2013, 02:16 PM   #157
ozeco41
Philosopher
 
ozeco41's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Moss Vale, NSW, Australia
Posts: 7,617
Originally Posted by david.watts View Post
(Continued.) Of course it is absurd to talk about about occurrences after the fact. Your perspective: if hijacker's passports found ... they were found. So what. My perspective: if hijacker's passports found ... what were the odds. Your perspective, "what is the point??" My perspective, I have an easier/better explanation. This is where my statement comes from: "So I had been thinking that recognition of the other side's perspective went without saying." Trying to show how improbable 9/11 has no purpose unless I can show the same events that happened on 9/11 can be explained away much more simply and much more probable. And after all that, that is what I am going to try to do.
.....
I should have said in my opening post that I would provide a simpler explanation. I did not.
So give us the simpler explanation. And try to not use the words "odds" and "probabxxx" - they do not help.
ozeco41 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 28th December 2013, 02:24 PM   #158
ozeco41
Philosopher
 
ozeco41's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Moss Vale, NSW, Australia
Posts: 7,617
Originally Posted by david.watts View Post
...You see a dead cat , we see the cat is alive. But which is it? Hence, we are disputing this.
YES....but don't keep circling the point...move forward.

"We" have said "Cat has no pulse" "Cat is squashed flat due to MVA"

And all you keep repeating is that the cat had crossed the road thousands of times and the probability of it getting run over was very low. And you imply "The cat is still alive" but don't actually get round to saying it.

And we keep saying "The probability on this occasion was 100% - see the cat is dead."

So over to you to prove that the cat is still living.

Change out of metaphor mode whenever it suits you.


PS
Its a long story but some years back my neighbour had a cat - and it frequently crossed the road in front of our adjoining properties.

It successfully crossed the road 3765 and one half times.

I don't think it had a 1:3766 chance of being alive. I thought - still think - it was 100% dead.

Last edited by ozeco41; 28th December 2013 at 02:29 PM.
ozeco41 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 28th December 2013, 02:25 PM   #159
Craig4
Penultimate Amazing
 
Craig4's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: I live in a swamp
Posts: 27,710
Originally Posted by david.watts View Post
As to the wave function, you are are correct. It collapsed. But this is what the whole inside job vs no inside job is all about. What we observe after the collapse -- say it collapsed right after the events of 9/11 -- is not the same. You see a dead cat , we see the cat is alive. But which is it? Hence, we are disputing this.
No. That assumes both positions are equally valid. Yours is not valid. This is not a matter of perspective. There is no evidence to support your claim of explosives, holograms, death rays or whatever else you people think happened. The fact you see a "live cat" as you put it, means your perception and interpretation are faulty. All points of view are not created equal. Some are better than others. Yours is not as good as most people's here because your point of view is not supported by evidence.
Craig4 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 28th December 2013, 02:29 PM   #160
jaydeehess
Penultimate Amazing
 
jaydeehess's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: 40 miles north of the border
Posts: 20,849
Originally Posted by ozeco41 View Post
So give us the simpler explanation. And try to not use the words "odds" and "probabxxx" - they do not help.
Well those of us having actually addressed the probability at the time of impact used known examples, facts, and logic. I assume that David will propose that an unknown, organization, not having been shown to exist, ( basically invoking ghosts), planted this passport ( and presumably the other three as well) in order to bolster the story of Saudi born hijackers. All of this in an effort to prove that followers of Saudi terrorist with his base in Afghanistan attacked the USA. This to be the pretext to invade Afghanistan and Iraq, perhaps to later invade Iran as well. Odd then that this completely made up scenario did not have the hijackers be Afghani or Iraqi. Then again there I go wondering at the logic and asking questions.

Last edited by jaydeehess; 28th December 2013 at 02:30 PM.
jaydeehess is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Reply

International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Conspiracies and Conspiracy Theories » 9/11 Conspiracy Theories

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 07:44 PM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

This forum began as part of the James Randi Education Foundation (JREF). However, the forum now exists as
an independent entity with no affiliation with or endorsement by the JREF, including the section in reference to "JREF" topics.

Disclaimer: Messages posted in the Forum are solely the opinion of their authors.