Conspiracy Theories are true! mmm not so much?...

You're not going to win any arguments using the basic premise of the null hypothesis because your n in this instance is 1. Statistics (especially inferential statistics) are essentially useless in this argument because you're not looking at a data set or an assumed larger population. OTOH the argument that you can find connections anywhere loosely ties in with data dredging, so that angle is possibly worth exploring (though still not really a sound tactic IMO, as again, you are not dealing with a data set).

Where you might find success in countering the conspiracy argument is either asking for substantial proof that there was a conspiracycomspiracy, or asking them to define the end goal of the comspiracy and seeing if the possible comspirators are any closer to achieving their end goal as a result of said comspiracy. I mean at least with the tobacco companies (as an example) there was an actual end goal that the comspirators were trying to achieve (more profits for the tobacco companies) by downplaying the health hazards associated with smoking.

edit: I see you (limpy) have taken that tactic of asking for the evidence or the master plan if you will.

I think it was just allowed to happen.

The point is that

a) "P" never ever ever equals zero

b) therefor normal circumstances will ALWAYS produce evidence of abnormal shit (especially given no constraints on what might constitute 'evidence').

  On 2/2/2016 at 9:33 PM, LimpyLoo said:

I remember I used to constantly bring up P-values and the null hypothesis with JE, and he couldn't possibly see what that shit had to do with beliefs about 9/11

He would cite the insurance thing and say 'explain that'

And I would say 'you would 100% expect to see fishy details like that no matter what'

And then I'd rant about P-hacking

But since most people don't know what a P-value is I look like I have fucking Tourette's bringing it up every post when he says 'explain that'

 

So yeah, scientific illiteracy rustles my jimmies

 

Same shit with my mom

She's like "I thought about my friend's foot, and then her foot felt better...explain that"

There's no one-sentence way to explain to her why that is bad evidence for psychic healing

if someone isn't scientifically curious to begin with, it's hopeless

you cite popular mechanics as if it has any value when hundreds of engineer have asked repeatedly questions about some very troubling and impossible conclusion from popular mechanics. Popular mechanics seems to have the same value as CNN (government ties).

Im ready to have my views changed, but so far it seems like many things that happened in 911 raise important question for many engineer and scientist.

I cannot recommend more this documentary.

About what I said in another thread about physic quantic, I never said that I knew what I was talking about. I think I said something like:<< IIRC, I think ive heard something cool like when observed, particles changes behaviour>>. I never implied what I said was the truth nor did I gave a damn about how exact I was. it was just small talk, fun facts sot of thing.

Your interpretation on how it collapsed is against what experts say. Ive heard many engineer say that the WTC7 collapsed in free fall motion in a very symetrical pattern which looks like a controlled demolition in many troubling ways. And again, fire or asymetrical damage coulndt have made the WTC7 fall on its own symetrically. and fire couldnt have made the wtc7 collapse.

the last 20 minute of that is about wtc7

BTW, this site is a absolute joke and can be debunked by anyone making the slight bit of research

http://www.debunking911.com/pull.htm

displaying reasonable judgement about which facts/concepts are accurate and relevant to use in an argument is not "scientific illiteracy". on the contrary, employing pop-science ideas that you learned on the internet as weapons in assuming some kind of authority about a subject you have no experience with and don't really understand, is worse.

stupid + a little 'science' = a lot more stupid.

wtc7

<<At the risk of repetition.WTC7 was an 81 vertically columned 47 storied steel framed high rise that dropped into its own footprint in 6.5seconds+or-, 2.25seconds of that in total gravitational freefall. Forensic study found temperatures up to 4,735F[Molybdenum spherules-USGS].FEMA reported Steel vaporized and evaporated with holes in it 'like Swiss cheese'.RJ.LEE found spherical metallic particles 150xnormal building dust,Spheres produced by Molten droplets being violently introduced into air. Independent analysis of DUST found Active Thermitic Material [Harrit/Jones:Bentham] High grade energetics IN the dust.Molten steel was seen in the piles 'running down the channel rails 'like in a foundry'.Eyewitness testimony of explosive events before during and after aircraft strike were established 118 times in audio transcripts.[barry Jennings.FDNY transcripts]NIST report is a 'probable THEORY',based on computer modeling un-tested by peers or x-examination paradigms not for public disclosure.

>>
For those who complain that opponents of the official 9/11 story just "cry about melted steel and stuff", I'll explain the significance. The laws of probability, thermodynamics and thermochemistry dictate that military-grade unreacted nano-thermite does not form spontaneously, and office fires of hydrocarbons burning in air of up to 21% oxygen cannot melt iron or steel. The time evolution of a spontaneous process will be in the direction of increasing entropy; thus, a sophisticated, highly energetic, nano-engineered accelerant comprising 40 nm-thick aluminum plates and 100 nm iron oxide grains requires a 'creator' - e.g., the U.S. military.

Not only fell in free fall, but fell in near-perfect symmetry. This can happen only if all the structural support is removed simultaneously. And consider that according to NIST's theory of an internal collapse, the columns at the east end of the building failed though they were carrying no load beyond their own weight.

  On 2/3/2016 at 12:23 AM, Ayya Khema said:

BTW, this site is a absolute joke and can be debunked by anyone making the slight bit of research

http://www.debunking911.com/pull.htm

why is it a joke and who debunked it?

Most watmm 2001: debunking a debunking site about conspiracy theories

this site is pure propaganda. http://www.debunking911.com/pull.htm is a propaganda site that has been debunked. do some research

you should read

http://www.prisonplanet.com/articles/september2006/220906debunksitself.htm

Basically, there was false truthers site created by the likes of http://www.debunking911.com/pull.htm that promoted easily debunked theories to descredit the truthers movement.

those sites are called the pod people

http://www.oilempire.us/pod.html

  On 2/3/2016 at 1:15 AM, eugene said:

 

  On 2/3/2016 at 12:23 AM, Ayya Khema said:

BTW, this site is a absolute joke and can be debunked by anyone making the slight bit of research
http://www.debunking911.com/pull.htm

why is it a joke and who debunked it?

 

<<You will learn with some ivestigation that the same people who brought you debunk911 and the popular mechanics hit piece was based on the pseudo-skeptic work from the same people who brought you missile pods , fuel tankers, holograms, tv fakery, loose change.

Months before the Popular Mechanics debunking 911, 'certain sites who push the missile pod disinfo also worked hard to develope 4 threads that were easily debunked. Missile pods, windowless Fuel tankers, Targeting lasers, and Flight 93 shot down. Truthers easily debunked the threads only to have their threads erased and accounts closed.

It was evident through inside sources and basic researching that popular mechanincs and the fake truther site worked together. In the popular mechanics article they refrenced Letsroll911.org as the truthers flagship while exploiting stupid theories that the truth movment NEVER embraced.

Basic disinformation traits. Straw man tactics.


Please read Pod People hijack the 9/11 truth movement

that's not how it works. you don't just get to call something propaganda and dismiss it as such without addressing its arguments seriously, i can just as easily call everything you bring propaganda as well and that'll be that. so in order to have a proper discussion first we have to establish certa...

actually fuck this all i don't even care about anything anymore anyway.

  On 2/3/2016 at 1:51 AM, eugene said:

that's not how it works. you don't just get to call something propaganda and dismiss it as such without addressing its arguments seriously, i can just as easily call everything you bring propaganda as well and that'll be that. so in order to have a proper discussion first we have to establish certa...

 

actually fuck this all i don't even care about anything anymore anyway.

Mixing true conclusions with false evidence -- conspiracies to make fake claims of conspiracy -- is an effective way to cover up conspiracy.

Its been well explained that theres many different movement of truthers, some that basically seem like false truther movement that act to the benefit of the likes of popular mechanics or http://www.debunking911.com/pull.htm, by bringing shitty theories like<< no plane>>, as a way to descredit the truth movement.

This is well explained

http://www.oilempire.us/pod.html

There is the truth movement that try to eliminate lies distortions and myths of 911 truthers like loosechange http://screwloosechange.blogspot.ca/ which acts as a way to descredit the real and important arguments by the truth movement

this is a great site to get started http://www.oilempire.us/911truth.html The documentary the new pearl harbour 911 is also a good way to get started.

then theres of course the ae911truth movement. many vides on youtube are available.

Steven Dusterwald, S.E. - Structural Engineer: https://youtu.be/I7oti6KGEf4

• Mr. Dusterwald presents contradictory evidence between the NIST model and the actual sequence of failures within all the WTC Buildings.

Tom Sullivan - Explosives Technician/Loader: https://youtu.be/u5IgqJXyLbg

• Former Explosives Loader for Controlled Demolition, Inc. (CDI) Tom discusses the complex process of preparing a building for controlled demolition and sites the reasons why WTC building 7 had to have been a controlled demolition.

Richard Humenn P.E. - WTC Chief Electrical Design Engineer:https://youtu.be/gJy7lhVK2xE

• Mr. Humenn gives us quite a unique perspective inside the elevator shafts in the twin towers and how access to the core columns could have been gained.

Kamal Obeid, C.E., S.E. – Civil/Structural Engineer:https://youtu.be/3WCcSHpvAJ8

• Mr. Obeid, a 30-year structural engineer explains how NIST's analysis actually disproves it's own theories on how WTC Building 7 collapsed, thereby confirming the use of controlled demolition.

Ed Munyak, FPE - Fire Protection Engineer: https://youtu.be/c0QEutd1Unc

• Mr. Munyak uses his considerable experience as a 25 year Fire Protection Engineer to expose the NIST reports of WTC 1, 2 & 7 as fraudulent.

Robert McCoy - High-Rise Architect: https://youtu.be/4-3FQtZnk2A

• Mr. McCoy expresses his doubt abut the official story and from NIST as to how these 3 skyscrapers were destroyed and calls for a new investigation examining he hypothesis of controlled demolition.

Kathy McGrade, B.S -- Metallurgical Engineering:https://youtu.be/Q6ziLE23Soo

• Kathy McGrade explains how normal office fires cannot melt steel and how the symmetrical collapse of all WTC skyscrapers, according to the official story violates the laws of physics and thermodynamics.

Bob Bowman PhD, Lt. Colonel (ret.): https://youtu.be/CROB5p-1GjE

• The former head of the Star Wars program under President Ford & Carter, has multiple engineering degrees and agrees that NIST is conducting a massive coverup.

  On 2/3/2016 at 12:44 AM, usagi said:

displaying reasonable judgement about which facts/concepts are accurate and relevant to use in an argument is not "scientific illiteracy". on the contrary, employing pop-science ideas that you learned on the internet as weapons in assuming some kind of authority about a subject you have no experience with and don't really understand, is worse.

 

stupid + a little 'science' = a lot more stupid.

lol at ex-cult member calling me stupid

speaking of which, people who "congratulate" me for leaving get a big fuck you. they don't get the situation. it's not some joyous emancipation, it's a slow falling away of old values that you held near and dear, which gave you comfort. to face the facts and make a change like that takes more balls than you'll ever have in your life, you whiny self-important bitch.

Was Ehrlichmann a Buddhist by any chance?

  On 2/3/2016 at 3:34 AM, doublename said:

Was Ehrlichmann a Buddhist by any chance?

I don't think so. Seems like there were a ton of side conversations about Buddhism and I never saw him chime in.

Ayya, I appreciate you laying out the case like that.

When I blaze up the PC in the morning I'll look over the stuff you posted.

  On 2/3/2016 at 3:29 AM, usagi said:

speaking of which, people who "congratulate" me for leaving get a big fuck you. they don't get the situation. it's not some joyous emancipation, it's a slow falling away of old values that you held near and dear, which gave you comfort. to face the facts and make a change like that takes more balls than you'll ever have in your life, you whiny self-important bitch.

Last night I wrote a long reply to your post, but I ended up losing it when I 'saved draft' in Tapatalk then closed it, then couldn't find how to retrieve it.

The gist was that I really do appreciate what you went through, and your description of it was actually really poignant.

At the same time, you don't know what I've been through in my life. (Nor, of course, is there any reason you'd know anything about my life beyond what I share here.) But suffice it to say that perhaps there's a reason I'm so annoyingly, vehemently anti-religion.

But in any case, I can absolutely appreciate you finding your own path, against the current of family and culture, against values and world views that met you with the momentum of a dozen generations behind them. That is indeed a difficult path to take. And life is already hard enough without the upstream struggles.

Anyway, that's all. Cheers.

  On 2/4/2016 at 3:23 AM, LimpyLoo said:

 

  On 2/3/2016 at 3:29 AM, usagi said:

speaking of which, people who "congratulate" me for leaving get a big fuck you. they don't get the situation. it's not some joyous emancipation, it's a slow falling away of old values that you held near and dear, which gave you comfort. to face the facts and make a change like that takes more balls than you'll ever have in your life, you whiny self-important bitch.

Last night I wrote a long reply to your post, but I ended up losing it when I 'saved draft' in Tapatalk then closed it, then couldn't find how to retrieve it.

 

The gist was that I really do appreciate what you went through, and your description of it was actually really poignant.

 

At the same time, you don't know what I've been through in my life. (Nor, of course, is there any reason you'd know anything about my life beyond what I share here.) But suffice it to say that perhaps there's a reason I'm so annoyingly, vehemently anti-religion.

 

But in any case, I can absolutely appreciate you finding your own path, against the current of family and culture, against values and world views that met you with the momentum of a dozen generations behind them. That is indeed a difficult path to take. And life is already hard enough without the upstream struggles.

 

 

 

Anyway, that's all. Cheers.

 

Forgive me if I am being nosy, but I am interested in reading about this as well. I would like to know your story, Usagi.

but the fact that they come out later shows that they do in fact exist, but only some of the ones floating around are true.

you just went and contradicted yourself in the very premise of this thread you complete and utter bellend.

Man replaces victimhood narrative with different victimhood narrative. More at 11.

  On 2/4/2016 at 3:23 AM, LimpyLoo said:

 

  On 2/3/2016 at 3:29 AM, usagi said:

speaking of which, people who "congratulate" me for leaving get a big fuck you. they don't get the situation. it's not some joyous emancipation, it's a slow falling away of old values that you held near and dear, which gave you comfort. to face the facts and make a change like that takes more balls than you'll ever have in your life, you whiny self-important bitch.

Last night I wrote a long reply to your post, but I ended up losing it when I 'saved draft' in Tapatalk then closed it, then couldn't find how to retrieve it.

 

The gist was that I really do appreciate what you went through, and your description of it was actually really poignant.

 

At the same time, you don't know what I've been through in my life. (Nor, of course, is there any reason you'd know anything about my life beyond what I share here.) But suffice it to say that perhaps there's a reason I'm so annoyingly, vehemently anti-religion.

 

But in any case, I can absolutely appreciate you finding your own path, against the current of family and culture, against values and world views that met you with the momentum of a dozen generations behind them. That is indeed a difficult path to take. And life is already hard enough without the upstream struggles.

 

 

 

Anyway, that's all. Cheers.

 

whatever, pal. this isn't the first time you've made empty overtures towards understanding and commonality. see you in the next thread spouting the same dumb shit.

I don't know what you've been through in your life but you can't have learnt much from it if you approach things the way you do. seems like your experiences - whatever they have been - have been wasted on you.

  On 2/4/2016 at 9:29 AM, Candiru said:

Forgive me if I am being nosy, but I am interested in reading about this as well. I would like to know your story, Usagi.

not the place, mayne. maybe next time I see ya.

  On 2/4/2016 at 11:55 AM, kakapo said:

Man replaces victimhood narrative with different victimhood narrative. More at 11.

aren't we all victims in this cruel world? I doubt you own as many pairs of lilac chinos as you'd like. everybody hurts. everybody cries. sometimes.

Those last two quotes weren't mine, btw

Usagi, I just love how I can't win with you

We used to clash all the time, and then I felt bad and apologized and steered clear of you

I try to say something embarrassingly sincere and personal and you're like "whatever, man...empty overtures"

I said "congrats on leaving" and you say "fuck you"

If you think I'm being disingenuous, then there's sorta nothing I can do about that

Based on your post in "the life thread", I think you see what you wanna see with me

And there's no information that'll change that

I reverted back to trading blows with you because you ignore my sincere posts

And seem to think I'm just posturing

*shrugs*

why are you even trying to win with me? is that really the problem here?

maybe if you tried to develop a more balanced and grounded view of things instead of just sucking up to me because I scorn your views, you'd get somewhere. this is your whole problem, you're not really concerned about how to correctly approach the thorny problems you constantly bring up (not restricted to religion), you're just after consensus and getting everyone to agree with you. building up the us vs them angle is your whole trip. I utterly despise that and no amount of peaceable remarks towards me will make a difference if you're going to simply carry on like you do.