FREE TAPATALK APP

Gravy · 9th October 2007, 09:42 PM

This September 11, Michael Shermer had a radio debate about 9/11 with Jim Fetzer on a St. Cloud, Minnesota radio show. Part 1 (mp3) Part 2 (mp3)

I imagine that Shermer heard that Fetzer was a "Scholar for Truth" and figured he'd dismantle him with logic. Shermer makes good points, but he's not well-versed in the specifics, and he's wholly unprepared for Fetzer's manic torrent of taurine excrement. Nor did he seem to realize that Fetzer is a proponent of the Star Wars hypothesis (I wonder if he'd have agreed to the debate if he knew that). Result: Fetzer's site proudly links to his encounter with skeptic supreme Michael Shermer.

I only made it through part of the debate. If anyone gets through part 2, let us know how it went.

Pardalis · 9th October 2007, 09:47 PM

Let me guess, uncle Fetzer is jumping haphazardly around from one subject to the other without giving Shermer anytime to catch his breath and understand what he's talking about...

*sigh*

Quad4_72 · 9th October 2007, 09:47 PM

Listening now.

tacodaemon · 9th October 2007, 09:49 PM

It's something a lot of skeptic types learned (or should have learned) from past experience debating slick creationist professional debaters of the Duane Gish variety -- these guys have their patter down and they can talk for hours without drawing a breath, spewing out so many cockamamie notions that you'd need 12 hours to address every one of them. I saw the hard time you and Ron had keeping up with Fetzer's endless babbling on "Hardfire," and both of you are more skilled at cutting in and talking over people than I think Shermer is.

Quad4_72 · 9th October 2007, 09:53 PM

Originally Posted by Pardalis

Let me guess, uncle Fetzer is jumping haphazardly around from one subject to the other without giving Shermer anytime to catch his breath and understand what he's talking about...

*sigh*

Correct you are. Shermer was making a point about the terrorists indeed being dead and using Popular Mechanics as a source. Fetzer then went on to completely change the subject and talk about how Popular Mechanics had some sort of hostile take over (Not sure what he was talking about). He also goes on to suggest that flight 77 flew OVER the Pentagon and just didn't hit it. That one is new to me.

Pardalis · 9th October 2007, 09:55 PM

Originally Posted by Quad4_72

He also goes on to suggest that flight 77 flew OVER the Pentagon and just didn't hit it. That one is new to me.

Oh no, Craig Ranke got to him...

Boy, adding stupid to stupid.

tacodaemon · 9th October 2007, 09:59 PM

Originally Posted by Quad4_72

Correct you are. Shermer was making a point about the terrorists indeed being dead and using Popular Mechanics as a source. Fetzer then went on to completely change the subject and talk about how Popular Mechanics had some sort of hostile take over (Not sure what he was talking about).

I assume he was talking about the shuffling of editorial staff after the previous editor-in-chief retired and was replaced by Jim Meigs, which truthers seem to think is suspicious due to their lack of contact with the real world or actual gainful employment. I'm surprised he didn't start in on Jason Bermas's beloved notion that because PM is owned by the present-day Hearst Corp., it must be operating according to the same journalistic standards William Randolph Hearst was infamous for 100 years ago. (Or did he?)

Quote:

He also goes on to suggest that flight 77 flew OVER the Pentagon and just didn't hit it. That one is new to me.

Ay yi yi, Fetzer has jumped on the Ranke-Marquis express train to the funny farm now? I guess after he joined Judy's space-beam movement, anything is possible.

T.A.M. · 9th October 2007, 10:01 PM

Is Fetzer still considered a player in the truth movement. I thought he was a lame duck?

TAM

Quad4_72 · 9th October 2007, 10:03 PM

Originally Posted by tacodaemon

Ay yi yi, Fetzer has jumped on the Ranke-Marquis express train to the funny farm now? I guess after he joined Judy's space-beam movement, anything is possible.

Oh and apparently Flight 77 crashed in the Ohio river as well after it flew over the Pentagon. After I heard that I uninstalled iTunes to make sure I could never here the mpeg again.

tacodaemon · 9th October 2007, 10:04 PM

Originally Posted by T.A.M.

Is Fetzer still considered a player in the truth movement. I thought he was a lame duck?

The "Scholars" gave him the boot after he joined Judy Wood's space-cadet academy last year. If he's endorsing the "Pentacon" flyover theory now, I guess he's just flailing about looking for any goofy notion to grab onto.

Pardalis · 9th October 2007, 10:18 PM

Originally Posted by Quad4_72

Oh and apparently Flight 77 crashed in the Ohio river as well after it flew over the Pentagon. After I heard that I uninstalled iTunes to make sure I could never here the mpeg again.

Oh my gosh, it's 1 am here and I think I just woke up the entire neighborhood.

Totovader · 9th October 2007, 10:19 PM

Originally Posted by T.A.M.

Is Fetzer still considered a player in the truth movement. I thought he was a lame duck?

TAM

No, he's on our payroll- along with Judy Wood.

R.Mackey · 9th October 2007, 10:25 PM

Originally Posted by Gravy

I imagine that Shermer heard that Fetzer was a "Scholar for Truth" and figured he'd dismantle him with logic. Shermer makes good points, but he's not well-versed in the specifics, and he's wholly unprepared for Fetzer's manic torrent of taurine excrement. Nor did he seem to realize that Fetzer is a proponent of the Star Wars hypothesis (I wonder if he'd have agreed to the debate if he knew that). Result: Fetzer's site proudly links to his encounter with skeptic supreme Michael Shermer.

Yeah, well. Look on the bright side. Fetzer may be proudly displaying the debate, but it won't serve him in the end. Stomping all over someone else in real time may sound exciting, but we can always go over his recordings and prove, after the fact, that he's a lying fool. By making those materials available, he exposes himself to even further discredit and ridicule. There's no win possible for him in the long run.

This is why science rarely takes the form of a debate. It's not a sprint, it's here for the long game. Possibly longer than we will last as a species.

a_unique_person · 9th October 2007, 10:27 PM

Originally Posted by Gravy

This September 11, Michael Shermer had a radio debate about 9/11 with Jim Fetzer on a St. Cloud, Minnesota radio show. Part 1 (mp3) Part 2 (mp3)

I imagine that Shermer heard that Fetzer was a "Scholar for Truth" and figured he'd dismantle him with logic. Shermer makes good points, but he's not well-versed in the specifics, and he's wholly unprepared for Fetzer's manic torrent of taurine excrement. Nor did he seem to realize that Fetzer is a proponent of the Star Wars hypothesis (I wonder if he'd have agreed to the debate if he knew that). Result: Fetzer's site proudly links to his encounter with skeptic supreme Michael Shermer.

I only made it through part of the debate. If anyone gets through part 2, let us know how it went.

It's just like scientists trying to debate Global Warming with the likes of Michael Crichton.

leftysergeant · 9th October 2007, 10:46 PM

That is just plain bad radio. I have always thought that part of the idea of bringing two people on at the same time was to present two sides of an issue. They have switches on those microphones, you know.

The hosts are either biased toward Fetzer or are wussie boys who are intimidated by him. I guess they went to the Sean Hannity school of journalism.

Unfit4Command · 9th October 2007, 11:18 PM

Where did people get the idea that the buildings could support 2000% of their live load?

Brainster · 9th October 2007, 11:28 PM

Originally Posted by T.A.M.

Is Fetzer still considered a player in the truth movement. I thought he was a lame duck?

TAM

The schism caused by the Kennebunkport Bunk has happened along generational lines and Tarpley is being supported by Uncle Fetzer and Kevin Barrett. This has worked very much to Fetzer's favor, because those three are all well-known to the media for their Trooferism.

Among the activists, Fetzer's actually despised by both the no-planers and the plane-huggers. But he's still a big player because the activists only make up a small portion of 9-11 Deniers and because of his media experience.

tacodaemon · 9th October 2007, 11:30 PM

Originally Posted by Unfit4Command

Where did people get the idea that the buildings could support 2000% of their live load?

Ooh! Ooh! I remember this one too. Here's how R. Mackey explained it back in June:

Originally Posted by R.Mackey

The "perimeter columns could handle 20 times their normal load" is a badly butchered quote-mine from comments that John Skilling made to the Engineering News Record in 1964. He is quoted as saying the live loads on the perimeter columns could be increased by 2000% before the perimeter columns would fail.

Assuming the quote is even accurate, this ignores, of course, the fact that the perimeter columns were sized for the overall load, e.g. the dead and superimposed dead loads, live loads, and also the wind loads. If you juggle the math such that every drop of margin gets treated as live load, i.e. on a windless day, you might get to a factor of 20. However, even that is suspect.

In other words, it's a lie. A stupid one.

Hyperviolet · 10th October 2007, 04:16 AM

I haven't listened to this yet, but by the sounds of it, Shermer doesn't do too great. Michael Shermer is a great mind, but it just sounds like the Hovind debate. Whereby, he didn't know his opponent's material enough, and was ambushed with a barrage of nonsense.

Arkan_Wolfshade · 10th October 2007, 07:49 AM

Originally Posted by Hyperviolet

I haven't listened to this yet, but by the sounds of it, Shermer doesn't do too great. Michael Shermer is a great mind, but it just sounds like the Hovind debate. Whereby, he didn't know his opponent's material enough, and was ambushed with a barrage of nonsense.

Same thing came to my mind. Shermer's brilliant and articulate, but he only does well in real structured academic debate settings. Shermer v. Hovind highlighted that.

Drudgewire · 10th October 2007, 07:56 AM

Originally Posted by Totovader

No, he's on our payroll- along with Judy Wood.

Ixnay on the isinformation-day gents-ay.

GT/CS · 10th October 2007, 08:00 AM

Originally Posted by Unfit4Command

Where did people get the idea that the buildings could support 2000% of their live load?

I'd guess that the live-load is insignificant compared to the dead-load so the quote may actually be true. For example, if the column is designed to support a dead-load of 10,000 pounds and a live-load of 30 pounds increasing the live load by 2000% really makes no difference.

Please note that those are just random numbers I am using for example purposes.

buka001 · 10th October 2007, 08:02 AM

Just curious - any links (video or audio or even transcript) to debates that Gravy has had?

MarkyX · 10th October 2007, 08:05 AM

Quote:

He also goes on to suggest that flight 77 flew OVER the Pentagon and just didn't hit it. That one is new to me.

And Fetzer "proudly" links to this?

Hyperviolet · 10th October 2007, 08:17 AM

Originally Posted by buka001

Just curious - any links (video or audio or even transcript) to debates that Gravy has had?

Gravy Vs Fetzer pt 1 : http://video.google.co.uk/videoplay?...arch&plindex=1

Gravy Vs Fetzer pt 2 : http://video.google.co.uk/videoplay?...67092800734293

Gravy Vs Fetzer pt 3: http://video.google.co.uk/videoplay?...arch&plindex=0

~enigma~ · 10th October 2007, 08:28 AM

Considering how often uncle Fester switched topics and rambled nonsensically, the very few words from Shermer highlighted the sheer lunacy from Fester. Can't believe he tried to verbally intimidate on the radio just like his touchy-feely crap against Gravy on Hardfire. I don't think it was a woo friendly host more than it was a host giving uncle Fester enough rope.

tacodaemon · 10th October 2007, 08:33 AM

Originally Posted by Hyperviolet

Gravy Vs Fetzer pt 1 : http://video.google.co.uk/videoplay?...arch&plindex=1

Gravy Vs Fetzer pt 2 : http://video.google.co.uk/videoplay?...67092800734293

Gravy Vs Fetzer pt 3: http://video.google.co.uk/videoplay?...arch&plindex=0

Yeah, Gravy does better than Shermer in those, yet they show that even someone as knowledgeable and quick-thinking as Gravy can have trouble in front of Fetzer's stupid-bukkake firehose...

tacodaemon · 10th October 2007, 08:35 AM

Originally Posted by ~enigma~

Considering how often uncle Fester switched topics and rambled nonsensically, the very few words from Shermer highlighted the sheer lunacy from Fester. Can't believe he tried to verbally intimidate on the radio just like his touchy-feely crap against Gravy on Hardfire. I don't think it was a woo friendly host more than it was a host giving uncle Fester enough rope.

I guess that's a plausible interpretation too -- perhaps the way we feel about these things depends on exactly how we try to put ourselves in the shoes of someone who is new to the topic and doesn't already have a lot of preconceived notions about the issues and the people in the debate. I sometimes go on the assumption that a naive newcomer to the topic might see the guy who talks endlessly and doesn't let anyone else get a word in edgewise as being confident and knowledgeable, which could make a positive impression, but on the other hand...

JamesB · 10th October 2007, 09:00 AM

Ack, what a travesty. Fetzer just screams the same talking points over and over again. It is almost not even worth debunking the idiot anymore though, Fetzer is pretty much marginalized in his own movement.

Drudgewire · 10th October 2007, 09:03 AM

I may need to read "Why People Believe Weird Things" again, but I'd have sworn Shermer was a proponent of never engaging these doofs (if memory serves, he was talking about Holocaust deniers at the time) in a debate for the very reasons he shouldn't have done this one.

~enigma~ · 10th October 2007, 09:05 AM

Originally Posted by tacodaemon

I guess that's a plausible interpretation too -- perhaps the way we feel about these things depends on exactly how we try to put ourselves in the shoes of someone who is new to the topic and doesn't already have a lot of preconceived notions about the issues and the people in the debate. I sometimes go on the assumption that a naive newcomer to the topic might see the guy who talks endlessly and doesn't let anyone else get a word in edgewise as being confident and knowledgeable, which could make a positive impression, but on the other hand...

I really believe that if an idiot like uncle Fester were actually given unopposed TV time he would singlehandedly be the end of the 9/11 woo. Before the breakup of scholars for 9/11 truth even Steven Jones said Fetzer was NOT a good spokesman for 9/11 truth. His antics unchecked would be a definite death rattle for the woo.

tacodaemon · 10th October 2007, 09:12 AM

Originally Posted by ~enigma~

I really believe that if an idiot like uncle Fester were actually given unopposed TV time he would singlehandedly be the end of the 9/11 woo. Before the breakup of scholars for 9/11 truth even Steven Jones said Fetzer was NOT a good spokesman for 9/11 truth. His antics unchecked would be a definite death rattle for the woo.

Jim Fetzer: The Firehose of Stupid

Hyperviolet · 10th October 2007, 09:39 AM

Originally Posted by tacodaemon

Yeah, Gravy does better than Shermer in those, yet they show that even someone as knowledgeable and quick-thinking as Gravy can have trouble in front of Fetzer's stupid-bukkake firehose...

Gravy was slow-paced in the 1st episode, granted. However, come parts 2 & 3 it just gets embarressing for Fetzer.

I just listened to the Shermer debate. Man, oh man, Fetzer is constantly inserting little falsehoods and factoids casuistically to add impact to his argument.
Example being: The supposed safety factor of 20.
It's points like these where Fetzer attempts a hit-and-run without challenge from Shermer, who simply has not studied the topic as meticulously as Mark.

Michael makes a logical case, unfortunately, it's just not enough against the moonbat Fetzer, who to the unsuspecting listener, might have sounded like the expert (as troublesome as that is).

CurtC · 10th October 2007, 10:04 AM

Originally Posted by ~enigma~

I really believe that if an idiot like uncle Fester were actually given unopposed TV time he would singlehandedly be the end of the 9/11 woo.

That's a GOOD point. Someone shouldn't try to counter him with facts during a debate, they should ask questions to lead the discussion and just let Fetzer show the crowd how insane he is.

Arkan_Wolfshade · 10th October 2007, 10:11 AM

Originally Posted by CurtC

That's a GOOD point. Someone shouldn't try to counter him with facts during a debate, they should ask questions to lead the discussion and just let Fetzer show the crowd how insane he is.

Was it Socrates or Aristotle that was a big fan of that methodology?

tacodaemon · 10th October 2007, 10:23 AM

Even Socrates and Aristotle got fed up with Jim Fetzer? No surprise there.

Mercutio · 10th October 2007, 10:38 AM

If I ever debate Fetzer, I want Gravy in the audience. His job will be to push a button every time Fetzer lies. The button (and associated high-voltage power supply) will, ideally, be attached to an airhorn, although I am not opposed to it being wired directly to Fetzer's nether regions. That way, the audience will be alerted to the fact that there are more lies than the ones I specifically choose to address.

tacodaemon · 10th October 2007, 10:59 AM

Originally Posted by Mercutio

If I ever debate Fetzer, I want Gravy in the audience. His job will be to push a button every time Fetzer lies. The button (and associated high-voltage power supply) will, ideally, be attached to an airhorn, although I am not opposed to it being wired directly to Fetzer's nether regions. That way, the audience will be alerted to the fact that there are more lies than the ones I specifically choose to address.

I humbly propose replacing the airhorn with a cuckoo clock sound.

Brainster · 10th October 2007, 11:02 AM

On the other hand, I think it's useful to take a step back at times from the minutiae and express some of the outrage that we all felt early in this process. I know that for all of the substantive debunking in the History Channel special, my favorite moment was when Davin Coburn dismissed the voice-morphed phone calls as "just plain offensive". It was the least substantive debunking of the night, and yet it was a slam dunk. Remember, we are not being judged by a high school forensics team; we are being judged by the general public.

That said, you do have to at least know the minutiae.

Mercutio · 10th October 2007, 12:52 PM

Originally Posted by tacodaemon

I humbly propose replacing the airhorn with a cuckoo clock sound.

You are kinder than I am. Can it be a cuckoo clock sound, but loud enough to cause tissue damage?

9th October 2007, 09:42 PM	#1
Gravy Downsitting Citizen Join Date: Mar 2006 Location: In the argyle Posts: 17,136	Shermer vs. Fetzer: Bad Idea This September 11, Michael Shermer had a radio debate about 9/11 with Jim Fetzer on a St. Cloud, Minnesota radio show. Part 1 (mp3) Part 2 (mp3) I imagine that Shermer heard that Fetzer was a "Scholar for Truth" and figured he'd dismantle him with logic. Shermer makes good points, but he's not well-versed in the specifics, and he's wholly unprepared for Fetzer's manic torrent of taurine excrement. Nor did he seem to realize that Fetzer is a proponent of the Star Wars hypothesis (I wonder if he'd have agreed to the debate if he knew that). Result: Fetzer's site proudly links to his encounter with skeptic supreme Michael Shermer. I only made it through part of the debate. If anyone gets through part 2, let us know how it went.
	__________________ "Please, keep your chops cool and don’t overblow.” –Freddie Hubbard What's the Harm?........Stop Sylvia Browne........My 9/11 links Last edited by Gravy; 9th October 2007 at 09:48 PM.

9th October 2007, 09:47 PM	#3
Quad4_72 AI-EE-YAH! Join Date: Nov 2006 Location: USA Posts: 5,830	Listening now.
	__________________ Looks like the one on top has a magazine, thus needs less reloading. Also, the muzzle shroud makes it less likely for a spree killer to burn his hands. The pistol grip makes it more comfortable for the spree killer to shoot. thaiboxerken

9th October 2007, 09:49 PM	#4
tacodaemon Muse Join Date: Jun 2006 Location: DC Posts: 571	It's something a lot of skeptic types learned (or should have learned) from past experience debating slick creationist professional debaters of the Duane Gish variety -- these guys have their patter down and they can talk for hours without drawing a breath, spewing out so many cockamamie notions that you'd need 12 hours to address every one of them. I saw the hard time you and Ron had keeping up with Fetzer's endless babbling on "Hardfire," and both of you are more skilled at cutting in and talking over people than I think Shermer is.
	__________________ "Killtown, your brain is like the four headed, man-eating haddock fish beast of Aberdeen." - Fr Ted @ LCF

9th October 2007, 09:53 PM	#5
Quad4_72 AI-EE-YAH! Join Date: Nov 2006 Location: USA Posts: 5,830	Originally Posted by Pardalis Let me guess, uncle Fetzer is jumping haphazardly around from one subject to the other without giving Shermer anytime to catch his breath and understand what he's talking about... sigh Correct you are. Shermer was making a point about the terrorists indeed being dead and using Popular Mechanics as a source. Fetzer then went on to completely change the subject and talk about how Popular Mechanics had some sort of hostile take over (Not sure what he was talking about). He also goes on to suggest that flight 77 flew OVER the Pentagon and just didn't hit it. That one is new to me.
	__________________ Looks like the one on top has a magazine, thus needs less reloading. Also, the muzzle shroud makes it less likely for a spree killer to burn his hands. The pistol grip makes it more comfortable for the spree killer to shoot. thaiboxerken

9th October 2007, 09:59 PM	#7
tacodaemon Muse Join Date: Jun 2006 Location: DC Posts: 571	Originally Posted by Quad4_72 Correct you are. Shermer was making a point about the terrorists indeed being dead and using Popular Mechanics as a source. Fetzer then went on to completely change the subject and talk about how Popular Mechanics had some sort of hostile take over (Not sure what he was talking about). I assume he was talking about the shuffling of editorial staff after the previous editor-in-chief retired and was replaced by Jim Meigs, which truthers seem to think is suspicious due to their lack of contact with the real world or actual gainful employment. I'm surprised he didn't start in on Jason Bermas's beloved notion that because PM is owned by the present-day Hearst Corp., it must be operating according to the same journalistic standards William Randolph Hearst was infamous for 100 years ago. (Or did he?) Quote: He also goes on to suggest that flight 77 flew OVER the Pentagon and just didn't hit it. That one is new to me. Ay yi yi, Fetzer has jumped on the Ranke-Marquis express train to the funny farm now? I guess after he joined Judy's space-beam movement, anything is possible.
	__________________ "Killtown, your brain is like the four headed, man-eating haddock fish beast of Aberdeen." - Fr Ted @ LCF Last edited by tacodaemon; 9th October 2007 at 10:02 PM.

9th October 2007, 09:47 PM	#2
Pardalis Banned Join Date: Mar 2006 Location: Montréal Posts: 25,831	Let me guess, uncle Fetzer is jumping haphazardly around from one subject to the other without giving Shermer anytime to catch his breath and understand what he's talking about... sigh

9th October 2007, 09:55 PM	#6
Pardalis Banned Join Date: Mar 2006 Location: Montréal Posts: 25,831	Originally Posted by Quad4_72 He also goes on to suggest that flight 77 flew OVER the Pentagon and just didn't hit it. That one is new to me. Oh no, Craig Ranke got to him... Boy, adding stupid to stupid.

9th October 2007, 10:01 PM	#8
T.A.M. Keeper of the Kool-Vax Join Date: Jul 2006 Location: The Far East...of Canada Posts: 20,816	Is Fetzer still considered a player in the truth movement. I thought he was a lame duck? TAM

9th October 2007, 10:03 PM	#9
Quad4_72 AI-EE-YAH! Join Date: Nov 2006 Location: USA Posts: 5,830	Originally Posted by tacodaemon Ay yi yi, Fetzer has jumped on the Ranke-Marquis express train to the funny farm now? I guess after he joined Judy's space-beam movement, anything is possible. Oh and apparently Flight 77 crashed in the Ohio river as well after it flew over the Pentagon. After I heard that I uninstalled iTunes to make sure I could never here the mpeg again.
	__________________ Looks like the one on top has a magazine, thus needs less reloading. Also, the muzzle shroud makes it less likely for a spree killer to burn his hands. The pistol grip makes it more comfortable for the spree killer to shoot. thaiboxerken

9th October 2007, 10:04 PM	#10
tacodaemon Muse Join Date: Jun 2006 Location: DC Posts: 571	Originally Posted by T.A.M. Is Fetzer still considered a player in the truth movement. I thought he was a lame duck? The "Scholars" gave him the boot after he joined Judy Wood's space-cadet academy last year. If he's endorsing the "Pentacon" flyover theory now, I guess he's just flailing about looking for any goofy notion to grab onto.
	__________________ "Killtown, your brain is like the four headed, man-eating haddock fish beast of Aberdeen." - Fr Ted @ LCF

9th October 2007, 10:18 PM	#11
Pardalis Banned Join Date: Mar 2006 Location: Montréal Posts: 25,831	Originally Posted by Quad4_72 Oh and apparently Flight 77 crashed in the Ohio river as well after it flew over the Pentagon. After I heard that I uninstalled iTunes to make sure I could never here the mpeg again. Oh my gosh, it's 1 am here and I think I just woke up the entire neighborhood.

9th October 2007, 10:19 PM	#12
Totovader Game Warden Join Date: Jan 2007 Location: Minneapolis, MN Posts: 2,240	Originally Posted by T.A.M. Is Fetzer still considered a player in the truth movement. I thought he was a lame duck? TAM No, he's on our payroll- along with Judy Wood.
	__________________ "It is useless to attempt to reason a man out of a thing he was never reasoned into." --Jonathan Swift Blog - Corrected By Reality. My debunking videos, and philosophy on YouTube Totovader's 9/11 Conspiracy Challenge Still unanswered!

9th October 2007, 10:25 PM	#13
R.Mackey Philosopher Join Date: Apr 2006 Location: The armpit of L.A. Posts: 7,857	Originally Posted by Gravy I imagine that Shermer heard that Fetzer was a "Scholar for Truth" and figured he'd dismantle him with logic. Shermer makes good points, but he's not well-versed in the specifics, and he's wholly unprepared for Fetzer's manic torrent of taurine excrement. Nor did he seem to realize that Fetzer is a proponent of the Star Wars hypothesis (I wonder if he'd have agreed to the debate if he knew that). Result: Fetzer's site proudly links to his encounter with skeptic supreme Michael Shermer. Yeah, well. Look on the bright side. Fetzer may be proudly displaying the debate, but it won't serve him in the end. Stomping all over someone else in real time may sound exciting, but we can always go over his recordings and prove, after the fact, that he's a lying fool. By making those materials available, he exposes himself to even further discredit and ridicule. There's no win possible for him in the long run. This is why science rarely takes the form of a debate. It's not a sprint, it's here for the long game. Possibly longer than we will last as a species.
	__________________ "Nothing real can defeat us. Nothing unreal exists." -B. Banzai VT VENIANT OMNES

9th October 2007, 10:27 PM	#14
a_unique_person Director of Hatcheries and Conditioning Join Date: Jul 2002 Location: Mt Disappointment Posts: 33,463	Originally Posted by Gravy This September 11, Michael Shermer had a radio debate about 9/11 with Jim Fetzer on a St. Cloud, Minnesota radio show. Part 1 (mp3) Part 2 (mp3) I imagine that Shermer heard that Fetzer was a "Scholar for Truth" and figured he'd dismantle him with logic. Shermer makes good points, but he's not well-versed in the specifics, and he's wholly unprepared for Fetzer's manic torrent of taurine excrement. Nor did he seem to realize that Fetzer is a proponent of the Star Wars hypothesis (I wonder if he'd have agreed to the debate if he knew that). Result: Fetzer's site proudly links to his encounter with skeptic supreme Michael Shermer. I only made it through part of the debate. If anyone gets through part 2, let us know how it went. It's just like scientists trying to debate Global Warming with the likes of Michael Crichton.
	__________________ *Continually pushing the boundaries of mediocrity.* Everything is possible, but not everything is probable. For if a man pretend to me that God hath spoken to him supernaturally, and immediately, and I make doubt of it, I cannot easily perceive what argument he can produce to oblige me to believe it. Hobbes

9th October 2007, 10:46 PM	#15
leftysergeant Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Jul 2007 Location: Spanaway WA Posts: 18,614	That is just plain bad radio. I have always thought that part of the idea of bringing two people on at the same time was to present two sides of an issue. They have switches on those microphones, you know. The hosts are either biased toward Fetzer or are wussie boys who are intimidated by him. I guess they went to the Sean Hannity school of journalism.

9th October 2007, 11:18 PM	#16
Unfit4Command Muse Join Date: Oct 2006 Posts: 730	Where did people get the idea that the buildings could support 2000% of their live load?
Unfit4Command Muse Join Date: Oct 2006 Posts: 730	__________________

9th October 2007, 11:28 PM	#17
Brainster Penultimate Amazing Join Date: May 2006 Posts: 10,539	Originally Posted by T.A.M. Is Fetzer still considered a player in the truth movement. I thought he was a lame duck? TAM The schism caused by the Kennebunkport Bunk has happened along generational lines and Tarpley is being supported by Uncle Fetzer and Kevin Barrett. This has worked very much to Fetzer's favor, because those three are all well-known to the media for their Trooferism. Among the activists, Fetzer's actually despised by both the no-planers and the plane-huggers. But he's still a big player because the activists only make up a small portion of 9-11 Deniers and because of his media experience.
	__________________ My new blog: Recent Reads. 1960s Comic Book Nostalgia Visit the Screw Loose Change blog.

9th October 2007, 11:30 PM	#18
tacodaemon Muse Join Date: Jun 2006 Location: DC Posts: 571	Originally Posted by Unfit4Command Where did people get the idea that the buildings could support 2000% of their live load? Ooh! Ooh! I remember this one too. Here's how R. Mackey explained it back in June: Originally Posted by R.Mackey The "perimeter columns could handle 20 times their normal load" is a badly butchered quote-mine from comments that John Skilling made to the Engineering News Record in 1964. He is quoted as saying the live loads on the perimeter columns could be increased by 2000% before the perimeter columns would fail. Assuming the quote is even accurate, this ignores, of course, the fact that the perimeter columns were sized for the overall load, e.g. the dead and superimposed dead loads, live loads, and also the wind loads. If you juggle the math such that every drop of margin gets treated as live load, i.e. on a windless day, you might get to a factor of 20. However, even that is suspect. In other words, it's a lie. A stupid one.
	__________________ "Killtown, your brain is like the four headed, man-eating haddock fish beast of Aberdeen." - Fr Ted @ LCF

10th October 2007, 04:16 AM	#19
Hyperviolet Damnum Fatale Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: Glaschu Posts: 988	I haven't listened to this yet, but by the sounds of it, Shermer doesn't do too great. Michael Shermer is a great mind, but it just sounds like the Hovind debate. Whereby, he didn't know his opponent's material enough, and was ambushed with a barrage of nonsense.
	__________________ The English are worried about the Euro being brought in because of loss of national identity and rising prices. In Scotland, people are just worried in case they have to close Poundstretcher.

10th October 2007, 07:49 AM	#20
Arkan_Wolfshade Philosopher Join Date: Jan 2006 Location: Making Mytheon come to life Posts: 7,158	Originally Posted by Hyperviolet I haven't listened to this yet, but by the sounds of it, Shermer doesn't do too great. Michael Shermer is a great mind, but it just sounds like the Hovind debate. Whereby, he didn't know his opponent's material enough, and was ambushed with a barrage of nonsense. Same thing came to my mind. Shermer's brilliant and articulate, but he only does well in real structured academic debate settings. Shermer v. Hovind highlighted that.
	__________________ 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.

10th October 2007, 07:56 AM	#21
Drudgewire Critical Doofus Join Date: Feb 2006 Posts: 9,434	Originally Posted by Totovader No, he's on our payroll- along with Judy Wood. Ixnay on the isinformation-day gents-ay.
	__________________ "You post a lie, it is proven 100% false, you move the goalposts and post yet another lie and it continues on around till we're back to the original lie as if it will somehow become true if it's re-iterated again. The same misquotes over and over again. The same hindsight bias, appeals to authority, etc." -lapman describing every twoofer on the internet

10th October 2007, 08:00 AM	#22
GT/CS Illuminator Join Date: Jul 2007 Posts: 3,628	Originally Posted by Unfit4Command Where did people get the idea that the buildings could support 2000% of their live load? I'd guess that the live-load is insignificant compared to the dead-load so the quote may actually be true. For example, if the column is designed to support a dead-load of 10,000 pounds and a live-load of 30 pounds increasing the live load by 2000% really makes no difference. Please note that those are just random numbers I am using for example purposes.
GT/CS Illuminator Join Date: Jul 2007 Posts: 3,628	__________________ SweatyYeti or Bill Munns would be my vote for looking at this - BFSleuth @ BFF I've got plenty of common sense! I just choose to ignore it. - Calvin; October 15, 1986

10th October 2007, 08:02 AM	#23
buka001 Thinker Join Date: Sep 2007 Location: Sunny South Africa Posts: 205	Just curious - any links (video or audio or even transcript) to debates that Gravy has had?
	__________________ Only the dead have seen the end of war!

10th October 2007, 08:05 AM	#24
MarkyX Master Poster Join Date: Jun 2006 Posts: 2,158	Quote: He also goes on to suggest that flight 77 flew OVER the Pentagon and just didn't hit it. That one is new to me. And Fetzer "proudly" links to this?
MarkyX Master Poster Join Date: Jun 2006 Posts: 2,158	__________________ MarkyX's Haunted Bloghouse - Read my boredom

10th October 2007, 08:17 AM	#25
Hyperviolet Damnum Fatale Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: Glaschu Posts: 988	Originally Posted by buka001 Just curious - any links (video or audio or even transcript) to debates that Gravy has had? Gravy Vs Fetzer pt 1 : http://video.google.co.uk/videoplay?...arch&plindex=1 Gravy Vs Fetzer pt 2 : http://video.google.co.uk/videoplay?...67092800734293 Gravy Vs Fetzer pt 3: http://video.google.co.uk/videoplay?...arch&plindex=0
	__________________ The English are worried about the Euro being brought in because of loss of national identity and rising prices. In Scotland, people are just worried in case they have to close Poundstretcher.

10th October 2007, 08:28 AM	#26
~enigma~ Banned Join Date: Nov 2006 Location: Center of the universe Posts: 7,954	Considering how often uncle Fester switched topics and rambled nonsensically, the very few words from Shermer highlighted the sheer lunacy from Fester. Can't believe he tried to verbally intimidate on the radio just like his touchy-feely crap against Gravy on Hardfire. I don't think it was a woo friendly host more than it was a host giving uncle Fester enough rope.

10th October 2007, 08:33 AM	#27
tacodaemon Muse Join Date: Jun 2006 Location: DC Posts: 571	Originally Posted by Hyperviolet Gravy Vs Fetzer pt 1 : http://video.google.co.uk/videoplay?...arch&plindex=1 Gravy Vs Fetzer pt 2 : http://video.google.co.uk/videoplay?...67092800734293 Gravy Vs Fetzer pt 3: http://video.google.co.uk/videoplay?...arch&plindex=0 Yeah, Gravy does better than Shermer in those, yet they show that even someone as knowledgeable and quick-thinking as Gravy can have trouble in front of Fetzer's stupid-bukkake firehose...
	__________________ "Killtown, your brain is like the four headed, man-eating haddock fish beast of Aberdeen." - Fr Ted @ LCF

10th October 2007, 08:35 AM	#28
tacodaemon Muse Join Date: Jun 2006 Location: DC Posts: 571	Originally Posted by ~enigma~ Considering how often uncle Fester switched topics and rambled nonsensically, the very few words from Shermer highlighted the sheer lunacy from Fester. Can't believe he tried to verbally intimidate on the radio just like his touchy-feely crap against Gravy on Hardfire. I don't think it was a woo friendly host more than it was a host giving uncle Fester enough rope. I guess that's a plausible interpretation too -- perhaps the way we feel about these things depends on exactly how we try to put ourselves in the shoes of someone who is new to the topic and doesn't already have a lot of preconceived notions about the issues and the people in the debate. I sometimes go on the assumption that a naive newcomer to the topic might see the guy who talks endlessly and doesn't let anyone else get a word in edgewise as being confident and knowledgeable, which could make a positive impression, but on the other hand...
	__________________ "Killtown, your brain is like the four headed, man-eating haddock fish beast of Aberdeen." - Fr Ted @ LCF

10th October 2007, 09:00 AM	#29
JamesB Master Poster Join Date: May 2006 Posts: 2,136	Ack, what a travesty. Fetzer just screams the same talking points over and over again. It is almost not even worth debunking the idiot anymore though, Fetzer is pretty much marginalized in his own movement.
JamesB Master Poster Join Date: May 2006 Posts: 2,136	__________________ I said lots of things in NPH that I would not say today and that I did not repeat in NPHR, where I specifically corrected at least some of the errors I had made in that earlier book, written 5 years ago. -David Ray Griffin-

10th October 2007, 09:03 AM	#30
Drudgewire Critical Doofus Join Date: Feb 2006 Posts: 9,434	I may need to read "Why People Believe Weird Things" again, but I'd have sworn Shermer was a proponent of never engaging these doofs (if memory serves, he was talking about Holocaust deniers at the time) in a debate for the very reasons he shouldn't have done this one.
	__________________ "You post a lie, it is proven 100% false, you move the goalposts and post yet another lie and it continues on around till we're back to the original lie as if it will somehow become true if it's re-iterated again. The same misquotes over and over again. The same hindsight bias, appeals to authority, etc." -lapman describing every twoofer on the internet

10th October 2007, 09:05 AM	#31
~enigma~ Banned Join Date: Nov 2006 Location: Center of the universe Posts: 7,954	Originally Posted by tacodaemon I guess that's a plausible interpretation too -- perhaps the way we feel about these things depends on exactly how we try to put ourselves in the shoes of someone who is new to the topic and doesn't already have a lot of preconceived notions about the issues and the people in the debate. I sometimes go on the assumption that a naive newcomer to the topic might see the guy who talks endlessly and doesn't let anyone else get a word in edgewise as being confident and knowledgeable, which could make a positive impression, but on the other hand... I really believe that if an idiot like uncle Fester were actually given unopposed TV time he would singlehandedly be the end of the 9/11 woo. Before the breakup of scholars for 9/11 truth even Steven Jones said Fetzer was NOT a good spokesman for 9/11 truth. His antics unchecked would be a definite death rattle for the woo.

10th October 2007, 09:12 AM	#32
tacodaemon Muse Join Date: Jun 2006 Location: DC Posts: 571	Originally Posted by ~enigma~ I really believe that if an idiot like uncle Fester were actually given unopposed TV time he would singlehandedly be the end of the 9/11 woo. Before the breakup of scholars for 9/11 truth even Steven Jones said Fetzer was NOT a good spokesman for 9/11 truth. His antics unchecked would be a definite death rattle for the woo. Jim Fetzer: The Firehose of Stupid
	__________________ "Killtown, your brain is like the four headed, man-eating haddock fish beast of Aberdeen." - Fr Ted @ LCF

10th October 2007, 09:39 AM	#33
Hyperviolet Damnum Fatale Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: Glaschu Posts: 988	Originally Posted by tacodaemon Yeah, Gravy does better than Shermer in those, yet they show that even someone as knowledgeable and quick-thinking as Gravy can have trouble in front of Fetzer's stupid-bukkake firehose... Gravy was slow-paced in the 1st episode, granted. However, come parts 2 & 3 it just gets embarressing for Fetzer. I just listened to the Shermer debate. Man, oh man, Fetzer is constantly inserting little falsehoods and factoids casuistically to add impact to his argument. Example being: The supposed safety factor of 20. It's points like these where Fetzer attempts a hit-and-run without challenge from Shermer, who simply has not studied the topic as meticulously as Mark. Michael makes a logical case, unfortunately, it's just not enough against the moonbat Fetzer, who to the unsuspecting listener, might have sounded like the expert (as troublesome as that is).
	__________________ The English are worried about the Euro being brought in because of loss of national identity and rising prices. In Scotland, people are just worried in case they have to close Poundstretcher.

10th October 2007, 10:04 AM	#34
CurtC Illuminator Join Date: Aug 2001 Location: Dallas, TX Posts: 4,761	Originally Posted by ~enigma~ I really believe that if an idiot like uncle Fester were actually given unopposed TV time he would singlehandedly be the end of the 9/11 woo. That's a GOOD point. Someone shouldn't try to counter him with facts during a debate, they should ask questions to lead the discussion and just let Fetzer show the crowd how insane he is.
	__________________ Is there a God? Find the answer at The Official God FAQ.

10th October 2007, 10:11 AM	#35
Arkan_Wolfshade Philosopher Join Date: Jan 2006 Location: Making Mytheon come to life Posts: 7,158	Originally Posted by CurtC That's a GOOD point. Someone shouldn't try to counter him with facts during a debate, they should ask questions to lead the discussion and just let Fetzer show the crowd how insane he is. Was it Socrates or Aristotle that was a big fan of that methodology?
	__________________ 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.