Maddox destroys conspiracy theory

Admiral · 27th July 2006, 08:26 AM

http://www.thebestpageintheuniverse....i?u=911_morons

Maddox might not be a great authority on much besides pirates and beef jerky, but this is pretty hilarious...

MarkyX · 27th July 2006, 08:35 AM

Someone needs to post this on the Loose Change boards.

Arkan_Wolfshade · 27th July 2006, 09:07 AM

Heh, the last sentence of the first paragraph is one of the best summaries of their movement I think I may have ever read.

Dragonrock · 27th July 2006, 09:09 AM

This is the greatest statement ever in the history of Loose Change

Quote:

Watching this video is like being bukakked with stupid.

gfunkusarelius · 27th July 2006, 09:30 AM

haha, very funny. it would do no good on LS boards tho. they would just say he was a patriotic republican american idiot or in on the conspiracy

Stitch · 27th July 2006, 10:03 AM

What I want to know is why the CT crew have to make thinks so damn complex. Why all this stuff about missles and controlled explosions? It's so full of holes that a 5 year old could pull it apart. Keep it simple, claim a couple of people from the CIA trained up some nutballs on terrorist methods and bank rolled the job - the rest is then just as we all saw it.

Regnad Kcin · 27th July 2006, 10:28 AM

Maddox is the best there is.

Admiral · 27th July 2006, 10:43 AM

Originally Posted by gfunkusarelius

haha, very funny. it would do no good on LS boards tho. they would just say he was a patriotic republican american idiot or in on the conspiracy

Maddox... a patriotic Republican American idiot...

Yeah, I think even the Loose Changers would have a hard time believing that.

MarkyX · 27th July 2006, 10:47 AM

Originally Posted by Admiral

Maddox... a patriotic Republican American idiot...

Yeah, I think even the Loose Changers would have a hard time believing that.

Do you want to bet?

Forty-Two · 27th July 2006, 10:51 AM

I love Maddox. I've seen him in person twice (once for The Alphabet of Manliness, once at Comic-Con), and he's really just some nerd. I was overjoyed to see that he'd updated today, even moreso when I saw the topic. He supplies my RDA of "irate."

Pardalis · 27th July 2006, 10:51 AM

Originally Posted by Dragonrock

This is the greatest statement ever in the history of Loose Change

Yeah, that whole bit is hillarious:

Quote:

Area 51? Hell yes. Roswell? Pass me the Kool-Aid. But "Loose Change" elevates BS to an artform. Watching this video is like being bukakked with stupid.

senorpogo · 27th July 2006, 11:36 AM

Originally Posted by gfunkusarelius

haha, very funny. it would do no good on LS boards tho. they would just say he was a patriotic republican american idiot or in on the conspiracy

Even if it doesn't change the mind of the hardcore LCs, it's definately good that someone who is popular amongst the young males demographic (LC's bread-n-butter) is making the 9/11 CT movement look stupid. Hopefully this will start a trend that makes it not cool to be into LC and 9/11 CTs. Again, it may not effect the diehards, but it may make the less obsessive members think twice. Nobody wants to be the subject of a Maddox rant.

gfunkusarelius · 27th July 2006, 11:46 AM

Originally Posted by Admiral

Maddox... a patriotic Republican American idiot...

Yeah, I think even the Loose Changers would have a hard time believing that.

well, that would put him in the "in on the conspiracy" contingent.

aggle-rithm · 27th July 2006, 12:02 PM

Originally Posted by Stitch

What I want to know is why the CT crew have to make thinks so damn complex. Why all this stuff about missles and controlled explosions? It's so full of holes that a 5 year old could pull it apart. Keep it simple, claim a couple of people from the CIA trained up some nutballs on terrorist methods and bank rolled the job - the rest is then just as we all saw it.

The complexity of the theories is intentional -- or, at least, it unintentionally serve a purpose in keeping the conspiracy theories alive. If they have an endless collection of small "questions" or "inconsistencies" to argue about, they can keep everyone off the fact that the central premise is so breathtakingly flawed that a retarded monkey would have trouble swallowing it.

Meffy · 27th July 2006, 12:14 PM

"Don't look too hard at our house of cards -- one strong eyebeam and it'll all come down! But look how complicated we were able to make it..."

Donks · 27th July 2006, 12:31 PM

Of course they are already discussing it.

grayman · 27th July 2006, 12:43 PM

Quote:

Haha, to summerise:

'Loose change is false because I SAID SO!'

Conversely, Loose Change is true because they say so?

Admiral · 27th July 2006, 12:43 PM

Originally Posted by MarkyX

Do you want to bet?

Wow, you're right:

Quote:

If they successfully de-bunked the good evidence they could demand some respect, but instead some, like Maddox, rely on purpetuating the myth that all people in government, elected and appointed, are actually pure of purpose.

MADDOX? Claiming that everyone in the government was pure of purpose?

This is the guy who compared Bush unfavorably to a box of Tic-Tacs and suggested we win the war through "Operation: Penny Drop," since dropping millions of pennies would be cheaper than bombs. (After the war ends, he notes, the citizens could rebuild their country by taking pennies out of the skulls of the dead.)

It's true that an idea is not made stronger or weaker by those who believe in it. But their assumption that Maddox is supporting the government by attacking "Loose Change" is absurd.

fuelair · 27th July 2006, 12:48 PM

Originally Posted by Donks

Of course they are already discussing it.

Thanks for that one. To use their own phrase, "What a bunch of F*@ktards!!"

fuelair · 27th July 2006, 12:50 PM

Originally Posted by grayman

Conversely, Loose Change is true because they say so?

Wonder how your quotee would winterize it?

gfunkusarelius · 27th July 2006, 01:19 PM

i think the complexity is what makes it so entertaining for a lot of people. if it was simple it would be boring. i still contend that, besides the mistrust of authority, the main reason people are into CTs is for entertainment. they just think it is cool that this "could happen" thru such an elaborate set of circumstances.
occams razor=the boring way out

Regnad Kcin · 27th July 2006, 01:21 PM

Quote:

If they successfully de-bunked the good evidence they could demand some respect, but instead some, like Maddox, rely on purpetuating the myth that all people in government, elected and appointed, are actually pure of purpose.

I must've missed where Maddox "purpetuat[ed]" that particular "myth."

Oh, wait, I actually read what Maddox wrote, not what I think he wrote.

Admiral · 27th July 2006, 01:48 PM

In the CTers' defense (four words you don't hear too often on this forum), consider how evolution must seem to people who aren't familiar with the evidence for it.

Imagine phrases that we use to ridicule Loose Change being used to ridicule evolution:

Quote:

What I want to know is why the Darwinists have to make things so damn complex. Why all this stuff about punctuated equilibrium and natural selection? It's so full of holes that a 5 year old could pull it apart.

Quote:

"Don't look too hard at our house of cards -- one strong eyebeam and it'll all come down! But look how complicated we were able to make it..."

Quote:

If they have an endless collection of small "questions" or "inconsistencies" to argue about, they can keep everyone off the fact that the central premise is so breathtakingly flawed that a retarded monkey would have trouble swallowing it. Monkeys turn into humans? Who would believe THAT?

In response to skeptics saying "So creationism is true only because the Bible says so?" they could respond, "As opposed to evolution being true because the scientists say so?"

If you look at it skeptically- Maddox is dismissing the CTers without looking at their arguments. If Maddox posted "There is no such thing as evolution, you idiots!" and talks about how stupid the idea of evolution is, including ad hominem attacks on Richard Dawkins, we'd respond to his rant with comments very similar to the Loose Changers.

Ashles · 27th July 2006, 02:01 PM

Originally Posted by Admiral

If they have an endless collection of small "questions" or "inconsistencies" to argue about, they can keep everyone off the fact that the central premise is so breathtakingly flawed that a retarded monkey would have trouble swallowing it. Monkeys turn into humans? Who would believe THAT?

Well no-one claims that.

Also evidence can be demonstrated for evolution - it can't for CTs.

So the analogy doesn't really work.

Admiral · 27th July 2006, 02:17 PM

Originally Posted by Ashles

Well no-one claims that.

Also evidence can be demonstrated for evolution - it can't for CTs.

So the analogy doesn't really work.

In no way am I saying that if evolution is true, that the conspiracy theory is also true.

I'm saying that the arguments the CTers are using- "he didn't address the evidence," "he's using ad hominem attacks," were valid.

This in no way means they're right.

Dark Jaguar · 27th July 2006, 02:22 PM

True, good point, but the difference is we did actually go over it, and apparently Maddox is at least somewhat familiar with actual debunkings (he makes it clear he won't bother with actual facts in his, because he's a comedian).

One thing though, what the heck is "bukakked"? I looked it up in dictionary.com as it was typed, then shortened to "bukakk", then assuming a mistype, I typed "bukak", but it wasn't available at all. Sounds german.

Forty-Two · 27th July 2006, 02:24 PM

The arguments that he "isn't addressing the evidence" are valid, but they miss the point. Maddox isn't outlining an argument; he's stating his opinion. His articles have never been about convincing other people he's right.

Whether you agree with Maddox or not, if you start examining his work for examples of enlightened debate, you're taking it waaaaay too seriously.

Regnad Kcin · 27th July 2006, 02:24 PM

Originally Posted by Dark Jaguar

One thing though, what the heck is "bukakked"? I looked it up in dictionary.com as it was typed, then shortened to "bukakk", then assuming a mistype, I typed "bukak", but it wasn't available at all. Sounds german.

More Greek, ho-ho.

Forty-Two · 27th July 2006, 02:25 PM

bukkake (Urban Dictionary)

Arkan_Wolfshade · 27th July 2006, 02:25 PM

Originally Posted by Dark Jaguar

True, good point, but the difference is we did actually go over it, and apparently Maddox is at least somewhat familiar with actual debunkings (he makes it clear he won't bother with actual facts in his, because he's a comedian).

One thing though, what the heck is "bukakked"? I looked it up in dictionary.com as it was typed, then shortened to "bukakk", then assuming a mistype, I typed "bukak", but it wasn't available at all. Sounds german.

The present tense form is bukakke. Don't look it up unless Japanese... err... subcultures do not offend you (think BDSM, or other similar broad category items).

Admiral · 27th July 2006, 02:42 PM

Originally Posted by Forty-Two

The arguments that he "isn't addressing the evidence" are valid, but they miss the point. Maddox isn't outlining an argument; he's stating his opinion. His articles have never been about convincing other people he's right.

Whether you agree with Maddox or not, if you start examining his work for examples of enlightened debate, you're taking it waaaaay too seriously.

Damn straight- and if Maddox started making entries like Randi's, I'd stop reading...

I was more defending the CTer's arguments against him, while opposing both their position and defending Maddox. (It's not easy to play the devil's advocate...)

ElWampa · 27th July 2006, 04:21 PM

Originally Posted by Donks

Of course they are already discussing it.

And it starts.

Quote:

Hishighness

Posted: Jul 27 2006, 10:11 PM

Actually, I’ve been looking in to Maddox a little more since I posted the original article and what I’ve found troubles me. I’m beginning to think Maddox may be a part of the “establishment”

senorpogo · 27th July 2006, 04:24 PM

Originally Posted by ElWampa

And it starts.

Quote:

Maddox depicts himself as a pirate. Everyone knows about Skull and Bones, the Yale Secret society that Dubya and Kerry were a part of. A pirate? Skull and bones? Jolly Roger? You do the math.

Ugh.

JLam · 27th July 2006, 04:34 PM

Quote:

Maddox depicts himself as a pirate. Everyone knows about Skull and Bones, the Yale Secret society that Dubya and Kerry were a part of. A pirate? Skull and bones? Jolly Roger? You do the math.

Oh sweet Jeebus that was good for a laugh.

MarkyX · 27th July 2006, 04:34 PM

Dylan Avery SPEAAAKS

Quote:

shame.

i was maddox's fan for the longest time...as long as I remember...I actually e-mailed him about the movie a while back, even gave him the link...

oh well.

Pwned.

Johnny C. · 27th July 2006, 06:40 PM

Definitely not a formal debunk, but the comedic touch has a large influence to younger people who really dont care about the conspiracy enough to research it. I know so many young people who see loose change and eat it up like candy. This will definitely help prevent uninformed people from being swallowed hole by the 'truth movement'.

Formal argument is nice, but sometimes people just need to step back and say "this is ****ing stupid" and leave it at that.

Gravy · 27th July 2006, 06:51 PM

I didn't know Maddox before. Now he's my favorite. I emailed him with thanks for speaking like I wish I could. BTW, he's aware of detailed debunkings: he linked to the Pop. Mechanics article and my LC critique.

gumboot · 27th July 2006, 06:59 PM

That was great. I have to say, his first point (about Dylan et al still being alive) is a fairly solid piece of evidence IMHO.

Perhaps the CTers will realise and take steps to make their doco "air tight".

-Andrew

Dark Jaguar · 27th July 2006, 08:37 PM

That's right morons, this guy who's spent the better part of a few years promoting a book about being macho and signning said books bought by losers with nothing better to do than wait for a comedian to show up and honor them with bad penmanship has been paid off by the government and his entire existance, his very pirate persona, was orchastrated by the CURRENT ADMINISTRATION since back in 1998. Good one! You nailed it retards! I just have one question. Which way does time, at a macroscopic scale at which Maddox seems to operate, tend to flow?

Note, I actually love that guy's site, but I wanted to emulate his comedic style as best I could.

Abbyas · 27th July 2006, 08:47 PM

Quote:

Now he's my favorite. I emailed him with thanks for speaking like I wish I could. BTW, he's aware of detailed debunkings: he linked to the Pop. Mechanics article and my LC critique.

Now that Maddox has posted your guide, you are officially famous.

Look out for Gravy The Movie! It'll be the first movie based on a message board.

27th July 2006, 08:26 AM	#1
Admiral Commander of the Fleet of Justice Join Date: Jan 2006 Posts: 770	Maddox destroys conspiracy theory http://www.thebestpageintheuniverse....i?u=911_morons Maddox might not be a great authority on much besides pirates and beef jerky, but this is pretty hilarious...
	__________________ "Crazy people don't know they're going crazy. They think they're getting saner." -Locke, from Lost

27th July 2006, 08:35 AM	#2
MarkyX Master Poster Join Date: Jun 2006 Posts: 2,016	Someone needs to post this on the Loose Change boards.
MarkyX Master Poster Join Date: Jun 2006 Posts: 2,016	__________________ - MarkyX Screw Loose Change video Frequently Stupid Theories 9/11 Deniers Speak - Exposing the movement 9/11 Deniers Speak - Ground Zero edition

27th July 2006, 09:07 AM	#3
Arkan_Wolfshade Philosopher Join Date: Jan 2006 Location: Making Mytheon come to life Posts: 7,158	Heh, the last sentence of the first paragraph is one of the best summaries of their movement I think I may have ever read.
	__________________ Amy: You should try homeopathic medicine, Bender. Try some zinc. Bender: I am forty percent zinc. Amy: Then take some echinacea, or St. John's Wort. Professor: Or a big fat placebo. It's all the same crap.

27th July 2006, 09:09 AM	#4
Dragonrock Militant Elvisian Tacoist Join Date: May 2002 Location: Dallas, TX Posts: 8,058	This is the greatest statement ever in the history of Loose Change Quote: Watching this video is like being bukakked with stupid.
	__________________ ...it rings a bell in my head that just don't chime...--pillory There is no God but the Great Taco In The Sky and Elvis is his prophet. GENERATION 7: The first time you see this, copy it into your sig on any forum and add 1 to the generation. Social experiment.

27th July 2006, 09:30 AM	#5
gfunkusarelius Critical Thinker Join Date: Apr 2006 Posts: 436	haha, very funny. it would do no good on LS boards tho. they would just say he was a patriotic republican american idiot or in on the conspiracy
	__________________ --------------------- "you can't argue with crazy" -not sure http://annoyed-skeptic.blogspot.com/ (my blog)

27th July 2006, 10:03 AM	#6
Stitch Muse Join Date: Jul 2004 Location: On the fence Posts: 672	What I want to know is why the CT crew have to make thinks so damn complex. Why all this stuff about missles and controlled explosions? It's so full of holes that a 5 year old could pull it apart. Keep it simple, claim a couple of people from the CIA trained up some nutballs on terrorist methods and bank rolled the job - the rest is then just as we all saw it.

27th July 2006, 10:28 AM	#7
Regnad Kcin Illuminator Join Date: Mar 2002 Location: The ol' Same place Posts: 4,729	Maddox is the best there is.
	__________________ My heros are Alex Zanardi and Evelyn Glennie.

27th July 2006, 10:43 AM	#8
Admiral Commander of the Fleet of Justice Join Date: Jan 2006 Posts: 770	Originally Posted by gfunkusarelius haha, very funny. it would do no good on LS boards tho. they would just say he was a patriotic republican american idiot or in on the conspiracy Maddox... a patriotic Republican American idiot... Yeah, I think even the Loose Changers would have a hard time believing that.
	__________________ "Crazy people don't know they're going crazy. They think they're getting saner." -Locke, from Lost

27th July 2006, 10:47 AM	#9
MarkyX Master Poster Join Date: Jun 2006 Posts: 2,016	Originally Posted by Admiral Maddox... a patriotic Republican American idiot... Yeah, I think even the Loose Changers would have a hard time believing that. Do you want to bet?
MarkyX Master Poster Join Date: Jun 2006 Posts: 2,016	__________________ - MarkyX Screw Loose Change video Frequently Stupid Theories 9/11 Deniers Speak - Exposing the movement 9/11 Deniers Speak - Ground Zero edition

27th July 2006, 10:51 AM	#10
Forty-Two The Answer Join Date: Oct 2004 Location: Carpinteria, CA Posts: 912	I love Maddox. I've seen him in person twice (once for The Alphabet of Manliness, once at Comic-Con), and he's really just some nerd. I was overjoyed to see that he'd updated today, even moreso when I saw the topic. He supplies my RDA of "irate."

27th July 2006, 10:51 AM	#11
Pardalis Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Mar 2006 Location: Montréal Posts: 18,554	Originally Posted by Dragonrock This is the greatest statement ever in the history of Loose Change Yeah, that whole bit is hillarious: Quote: Area 51? Hell yes. Roswell? Pass me the Kool-Aid. But "Loose Change" elevates BS to an artform. Watching this video is like being bukakked with stupid.
	__________________ "It's much better to change your point of view in response to reality than to insist reality has got it wrong because it doesn't share your point of view." aggle-rithm "In reality, the most astonishingly incredible coincidence imaginable would be the complete absence of all coincidences." John Allen Paulos

27th July 2006, 11:36 AM	#12
senorpogo Master Poster Join Date: Mar 2006 Posts: 2,005	Originally Posted by gfunkusarelius haha, very funny. it would do no good on LS boards tho. they would just say he was a patriotic republican american idiot or in on the conspiracy Even if it doesn't change the mind of the hardcore LCs, it's definately good that someone who is popular amongst the young males demographic (LC's bread-n-butter) is making the 9/11 CT movement look stupid. Hopefully this will start a trend that makes it not cool to be into LC and 9/11 CTs. Again, it may not effect the diehards, but it may make the less obsessive members think twice. Nobody wants to be the subject of a Maddox rant.
senorpogo Master Poster Join Date: Mar 2006 Posts: 2,005

27th July 2006, 11:46 AM	#13
gfunkusarelius Critical Thinker Join Date: Apr 2006 Posts: 436	Originally Posted by Admiral Maddox... a patriotic Republican American idiot... Yeah, I think even the Loose Changers would have a hard time believing that. well, that would put him in the "in on the conspiracy" contingent.
	__________________ --------------------- "you can't argue with crazy" -not sure http://annoyed-skeptic.blogspot.com/ (my blog)

27th July 2006, 12:02 PM	#14
aggle-rithm Philosopher Join Date: Jun 2005 Location: Austin, TX Posts: 6,271	Originally Posted by Stitch What I want to know is why the CT crew have to make thinks so damn complex. Why all this stuff about missles and controlled explosions? It's so full of holes that a 5 year old could pull it apart. Keep it simple, claim a couple of people from the CIA trained up some nutballs on terrorist methods and bank rolled the job - the rest is then just as we all saw it. The complexity of the theories is intentional -- or, at least, it unintentionally serve a purpose in keeping the conspiracy theories alive. If they have an endless collection of small "questions" or "inconsistencies" to argue about, they can keep everyone off the fact that the central premise is so breathtakingly flawed that a retarded monkey would have trouble swallowing it.
	__________________ To understand recursion, you must first understand recursion. Woo's razor: Never attribute to stupidity that which can be adequately explained by aliens.

27th July 2006, 12:14 PM	#15
Meffy Anthropomorphic Skunk Join Date: Feb 2004 Location: Unincorporated Territory of Croatan Posts: 4,232	"Don't look too hard at our house of cards -- one strong eyebeam and it'll all come down! But look how complicated we were able to make it..."

27th July 2006, 12:31 PM	#16
Donks vBulletin God Join Date: Jan 2004 Posts: 3,321	Of course they are already discussing it.
Donks vBulletin God Join Date: Jan 2004 Posts: 3,321

27th July 2006, 12:43 PM	#17
grayman Happy-go-lucky Heretic Join Date: Apr 2006 Location: Casa del Whacko Posts: 5,237	Quote: Haha, to summerise: 'Loose change is false because I SAID SO!' Conversely, Loose Change is true because they say so?

27th July 2006, 12:43 PM	#18
Admiral Commander of the Fleet of Justice Join Date: Jan 2006 Posts: 770	Originally Posted by MarkyX Do you want to bet? Wow, you're right: Quote: If they successfully de-bunked the good evidence they could demand some respect, but instead some, like Maddox, rely on purpetuating the myth that all people in government, elected and appointed, are actually pure of purpose. MADDOX? Claiming that everyone in the government was pure of purpose? This is the guy who compared Bush unfavorably to a box of Tic-Tacs and suggested we win the war through "Operation: Penny Drop," since dropping millions of pennies would be cheaper than bombs. (After the war ends, he notes, the citizens could rebuild their country by taking pennies out of the skulls of the dead.) It's true that an idea is not made stronger or weaker by those who believe in it. But their assumption that Maddox is supporting the government by attacking "Loose Change" is absurd.
	__________________ "Crazy people don't know they're going crazy. They think they're getting saner." -Locke, from Lost

27th July 2006, 12:48 PM	#19
fuelair Cythraul Enfys Join Date: May 2006 Posts: 15,899	Originally Posted by Donks Of course they are already discussing it. Thanks for that one. To use their own phrase, "What a bunch of F*@ktards!!"
fuelair Cythraul Enfys Join Date: May 2006 Posts: 15,899

27th July 2006, 12:50 PM	#20
fuelair Cythraul Enfys Join Date: May 2006 Posts: 15,899	Let's summerise Originally Posted by grayman Conversely, Loose Change is true because they say so? Wonder how your quotee would winterize it?
fuelair Cythraul Enfys Join Date: May 2006 Posts: 15,899

27th July 2006, 01:19 PM	#21
gfunkusarelius Critical Thinker Join Date: Apr 2006 Posts: 436	i think the complexity is what makes it so entertaining for a lot of people. if it was simple it would be boring. i still contend that, besides the mistrust of authority, the main reason people are into CTs is for entertainment. they just think it is cool that this "could happen" thru such an elaborate set of circumstances. occams razor=the boring way out
	__________________ --------------------- "you can't argue with crazy" -not sure http://annoyed-skeptic.blogspot.com/ (my blog)

27th July 2006, 01:21 PM	#22
Regnad Kcin Illuminator Join Date: Mar 2002 Location: The ol' Same place Posts: 4,729	Quote: If they successfully de-bunked the good evidence they could demand some respect, but instead some, like Maddox, rely on purpetuating the myth that all people in government, elected and appointed, are actually pure of purpose. I must've missed where Maddox "purpetuat[ed]" that particular "myth." Oh, wait, I actually read what Maddox wrote, not what I think he wrote.
	__________________ My heros are Alex Zanardi and Evelyn Glennie.

27th July 2006, 01:48 PM	#23
Admiral Commander of the Fleet of Justice Join Date: Jan 2006 Posts: 770	In the CTers' defense (four words you don't hear too often on this forum), consider how evolution must seem to people who aren't familiar with the evidence for it. Imagine phrases that we use to ridicule Loose Change being used to ridicule evolution: Quote: What I want to know is why the Darwinists have to make things so damn complex. Why all this stuff about punctuated equilibrium and natural selection? It's so full of holes that a 5 year old could pull it apart. Quote: "Don't look too hard at our house of cards -- one strong eyebeam and it'll all come down! But look how complicated we were able to make it..." Quote: If they have an endless collection of small "questions" or "inconsistencies" to argue about, they can keep everyone off the fact that the central premise is so breathtakingly flawed that a retarded monkey would have trouble swallowing it. Monkeys turn into humans? Who would believe THAT? In response to skeptics saying "So creationism is true only because the Bible says so?" they could respond, "As opposed to evolution being true because the scientists say so?" If you look at it skeptically- Maddox is dismissing the CTers without looking at their arguments. If Maddox posted "There is no such thing as evolution, you idiots!" and talks about how stupid the idea of evolution is, including ad hominem attacks on Richard Dawkins, we'd respond to his rant with comments very similar to the Loose Changers.
	__________________ "Crazy people don't know they're going crazy. They think they're getting saner." -Locke, from Lost

27th July 2006, 02:01 PM	#24
Ashles Pith Artist Join Date: Apr 2003 Location: The '80s Posts: 7,652	Originally Posted by Admiral If they have an endless collection of small "questions" or "inconsistencies" to argue about, they can keep everyone off the fact that the central premise is so breathtakingly flawed that a retarded monkey would have trouble swallowing it. Monkeys turn into humans? Who would believe THAT? Well no-one claims that. Also evidence can be demonstrated for evolution - it can't for CTs. So the analogy doesn't really work.
	__________________ With extraordinary few exceptions no educated person in the history of Western Civilization from the third century B.C. onward believed that the earth was flat. - Jeffrey Burton Russell No one "proved" that a bumblebee can't fly. What was shown was that a certain simple mathematical model wasn't adequate or appropriate - Ivars Peterson

27th July 2006, 02:17 PM	#25
Admiral Commander of the Fleet of Justice Join Date: Jan 2006 Posts: 770	Originally Posted by Ashles Well no-one claims that. Also evidence can be demonstrated for evolution - it can't for CTs. So the analogy doesn't really work. In no way am I saying that if evolution is true, that the conspiracy theory is also true. I'm saying that the arguments the CTers are using- "he didn't address the evidence," "he's using ad hominem attacks," were valid. This in no way means they're right.
	__________________ "Crazy people don't know they're going crazy. They think they're getting saner." -Locke, from Lost

27th July 2006, 02:22 PM	#26
Dark Jaguar Graduate Poster Join Date: Jan 2006 Posts: 1,666	True, good point, but the difference is we did actually go over it, and apparently Maddox is at least somewhat familiar with actual debunkings (he makes it clear he won't bother with actual facts in his, because he's a comedian). One thing though, what the heck is "bukakked"? I looked it up in dictionary.com as it was typed, then shortened to "bukakk", then assuming a mistype, I typed "bukak", but it wasn't available at all. Sounds german.

27th July 2006, 02:24 PM	#27
Forty-Two The Answer Join Date: Oct 2004 Location: Carpinteria, CA Posts: 912	The arguments that he "isn't addressing the evidence" are valid, but they miss the point. Maddox isn't outlining an argument; he's stating his opinion. His articles have never been about convincing other people he's right. Whether you agree with Maddox or not, if you start examining his work for examples of enlightened debate, you're taking it waaaaay too seriously.

27th July 2006, 02:24 PM	#28
Regnad Kcin Illuminator Join Date: Mar 2002 Location: The ol' Same place Posts: 4,729	Originally Posted by Dark Jaguar One thing though, what the heck is "bukakked"? I looked it up in dictionary.com as it was typed, then shortened to "bukakk", then assuming a mistype, I typed "bukak", but it wasn't available at all. Sounds german. More Greek, ho-ho.
	__________________ My heros are Alex Zanardi and Evelyn Glennie.

27th July 2006, 02:25 PM	#29
Forty-Two The Answer Join Date: Oct 2004 Location: Carpinteria, CA Posts: 912	bukkake (Urban Dictionary)

27th July 2006, 02:25 PM	#30
Arkan_Wolfshade Philosopher Join Date: Jan 2006 Location: Making Mytheon come to life Posts: 7,158	Originally Posted by Dark Jaguar True, good point, but the difference is we did actually go over it, and apparently Maddox is at least somewhat familiar with actual debunkings (he makes it clear he won't bother with actual facts in his, because he's a comedian). One thing though, what the heck is "bukakked"? I looked it up in dictionary.com as it was typed, then shortened to "bukakk", then assuming a mistype, I typed "bukak", but it wasn't available at all. Sounds german. The present tense form is bukakke. Don't look it up unless Japanese... err... subcultures do not offend you (think BDSM, or other similar broad category items).
	__________________ Amy: You should try homeopathic medicine, Bender. Try some zinc. Bender: I am forty percent zinc. Amy: Then take some echinacea, or St. John's Wort. Professor: Or a big fat placebo. It's all the same crap.

27th July 2006, 02:42 PM	#31
Admiral Commander of the Fleet of Justice Join Date: Jan 2006 Posts: 770	Originally Posted by Forty-Two The arguments that he "isn't addressing the evidence" are valid, but they miss the point. Maddox isn't outlining an argument; he's stating his opinion. His articles have never been about convincing other people he's right. Whether you agree with Maddox or not, if you start examining his work for examples of enlightened debate, you're taking it waaaaay too seriously. Damn straight- and if Maddox started making entries like Randi's, I'd stop reading... I was more defending the CTer's arguments against him, while opposing both their position and defending Maddox. (It's not easy to play the devil's advocate...)
	__________________ "Crazy people don't know they're going crazy. They think they're getting saner." -Locke, from Lost

27th July 2006, 04:21 PM	#32
ElWampa Scholar Join Date: Jun 2006 Location: Austin, Tx Posts: 54	Originally Posted by Donks Of course they are already discussing it. And it starts. Quote: Hishighness Posted: Jul 27 2006, 10:11 PM Actually, I’ve been looking in to Maddox a little more since I posted the original article and what I’ve found troubles me. I’m beginning to think Maddox may be a part of the “establishment”

27th July 2006, 04:24 PM	#33
senorpogo Master Poster Join Date: Mar 2006 Posts: 2,005	Originally Posted by ElWampa And it starts. Quote: Maddox depicts himself as a pirate. Everyone knows about Skull and Bones, the Yale Secret society that Dubya and Kerry were a part of. A pirate? Skull and bones? Jolly Roger? You do the math. Ugh.
senorpogo Master Poster Join Date: Mar 2006 Posts: 2,005

27th July 2006, 04:34 PM	#34
JLam Proud Skepkid Parent Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Low and away Posts: 4,157	Quote: Maddox depicts himself as a pirate. Everyone knows about Skull and Bones, the Yale Secret society that Dubya and Kerry were a part of. A pirate? Skull and bones? Jolly Roger? You do the math. Oh sweet Jeebus that was good for a laugh.
	__________________ Help take down Sylvia Browne. "what's dicksing? my dicksionary have no word for that" - Pillory

27th July 2006, 04:34 PM	#35
MarkyX Master Poster Join Date: Jun 2006 Posts: 2,016	Dylan Avery SPEAAAKS Quote: shame. i was maddox's fan for the longest time...as long as I remember...I actually e-mailed him about the movie a while back, even gave him the link... oh well. Pwned.
MarkyX Master Poster Join Date: Jun 2006 Posts: 2,016	__________________ - MarkyX Screw Loose Change video Frequently Stupid Theories 9/11 Deniers Speak - Exposing the movement 9/11 Deniers Speak - Ground Zero edition