Response to Cozmikzen about september 11, part 1 of 2

[julzabro]

ALL the buildings fell as IF to be controlled demolition and fell faster than they should've.

[julzabro]

There's been plenty of consistent scientific theories about 911 being a conspiracy...along with MOTIVE! A bunch of terorists with box cutters soes not answer all the questions either. Building 7 falling without being hit...what about that? I didn't hear u debunk anything. U merely gave YOUR opinion!

[NoNORADon911]

You ugly,you ugly,yo momma says you ugly,lol. Good luck with that neanderthal boy.

[batfly]

So... A statement can not be true and wrong at the same time...

OK...How about this statement kurtilein3...

"Everything I say is a lie."

[kurtilein3]

a statement that contradicts itself cannot be true, because there will always be at least 1 contradiction left.

a statement that cannot be true must be wrong.

[kurtilein3]

... second comment

maybe "contradiction" is not the right word here. basically, the statement says that the person that makes it only makes wrong statements, which includes the statement itself. logically, "Everything I say is a lie" is equivalent to "this statement is wrong".

so how can it be true if it follows from itself that its wrong? simple: it cannot be true. its wrong. and even if it would say "the grass is green, dogs bark, and this statement is wrong" it would still be wrong.

[batfly]

@kurtilein3

The statement "Everything I say is a lie." is self referential / recursive and ultimately paradoxical.

It is a black hole from which even the most solid of absolute black and white logic can not escape.

[kurtilein3]

batfly: if you drop parts of logic and want to keep the rest, things that appear to be logical black holes might appear.

if you want to use logic to get to the bottom of the issue, then the statement has to be wrong because a statement cannot be true and wrong at the same time. its illogical. not a black hole, just a flawed statement.

"everything i say is a lie" is logically incorrect just like "2+2=5" is mathematically incorrect.

[batfly]

@kurtilein3

How am I dropping any parts of logic? All I am doing is challenging your iron clad absolute empiricism.

Are you familiar with quantum mechanics? If not, just know this... everything you touch, taste, smell, hear, or see with one of your 5 senses is governed by quantum physics.

Have you ever heard of the measurement problem?

[kurtilein3]

i am familiar with quantum mechanics, and...

well, it doesnt disprove logic. your statements do not suddenly turn more correct or less ignorant just by mentioning "quantum mechanics" as if it would be some kind of magic formula to save your non-waterproof arguments from a healthy shower of logic.

by the way: quantum mechanics doesnt even disprove relativity. everything you touch, taste, and so on, is governed by the laws of nature. not by quantum mechanics alone.

[batfly]

Why use pejoratives and elitist snobbery? (If you want me to shut up fine. Just say so.)

You conveniently ignore premise regarding the measurement problem. Again. Do you know what the measurement problem is?

If not... it can be reproduced by using the double slit experiment where photons are shot through two slits. When there is no observer the photons act as a wave function. when observed the wave function collapses.

example:

watch?v=DfPeprQ7oGc

I know why did 5 marry 7 right?

[ozbodozzy]

dude, are you Heath Ledger? you look exactly the same

[Brinkman911]

Now measure it for yoursel using NISTs own parameters as set in the final report (roofline to fall 18 stories (disappear from view). Is the reality 3.9s as admitted by NIST analysis of the same video or is it 5.4 as produced by their model?

Is 3.9s for 18 stories to fall the same as complete free fall?

Is NIST's assertion that free fall is when an object has no structural components below it a true statement according to reality and the laws of nature?

[Brinkman911]

In this video, watch?v=V0GHVEKrhng the lead investigator of the WTC7 collapse admits the time it takes for the roofline to fall from view as viewed from this video watch?v=LD06SAf0p9A is 3.9 seconds, but the time for the MODEL to fall the same distance is 5.4s, true or false?

Disregarding observed reality and changing measured facts in an investigation is a criminial offence, true of false?

[kurtilein3]

that doesnt matter, the problem is you dont have a theory.

you conspiracy morons are unable to explain what happened on that day. you manage to find some small flaws in this really big story.

by the way, conspiracy theorysts are notorious for just making shit up. so why should i believe you unless you present evidence?

evidence that SUPPORTS YOUR story. you know, just like disproving evolution doesnt automatically prove that god did it.

[Brinkman911]

So for you it doesn't matter if NIST consciously falsified their report and it is a 'small flaw' that the building collapsed in free fall speed? Jeez.. And you talk about morons. (namecalling typical for disinformationsists)

And then you have the nerve to say that I am making things up and not presenting evidence, when what I have just done is present undisputable HARD EVIDENCE.

[Brinkman911]

But I see that general understanding of concepts and arguments is seriously lacking, shame.

The theory presented here is the official one. And I just proved it falsified and wrong.

And the example of creationism should be that it can't be true when evidence disproves it, so you got that one wrong too.

Stop your silly name calling and stick to the evidence, but I guess your game is to feel superior by putting people down, no matter what the real truth is.

[resistance0311]

watch?v=uEsd_o_yvUU

[kurtilein3]

they just repeat the same stuff that other conspiracy theorysts made up earlier. nothing really specific, no chromatography results, no results of metallurgical studies, nothing specific about the labs and the methods used.

very weak. if you research BOTH sides of this, and do your homework, and look at what educated skeptical experts in the field say, then you would find solid and detailed verifyable data that is consistent with repeatable experimentation explaining all that happened.

[alvarbilly]

Wow, who's paying you to help cover up the monstrosity perpetrated by the bush administration? 9/11 stank from day one, and the stench continues to grow with your assistance. You seem like a good guy, but i suppose it's another instance of 'can't judge a book by its cover'. I sincerely hope you see the light soon. Peace, love and freedom

[kurtilein3]

your logic stinks, and the sources of information you believe in. and your little group of deluded 9/11 conspiracy theorysts.

look at both sides of the story, search the internet for websites focused on DEBUNKING stuff like loose change, and the other already debunked and deceptive nonsense you regularly brainwash yourselves with. maybe get the facts about steel, and what blacksmiths are able to do with it, the "hot while soft but not yet melting"-part might be iteresting.

[resistance0311]

Right , it was no inside job . It appears that jet fuel melts steel tho . I think demolition companies shod cease to exist , if you want to bring building down just pour some jet fuel on it and it will collapse in its own footprint .

[kurtilein3]

do your research. you just go around dropping your little bombs of stupidity, and then its soooo much work to clean up the aftermath.

melting is not necessary, ask a blacksmith, steel gets soft LONG BEFORE melting. it didnt collapse perfectly in its own footprint, other buildings got damaged/destroyed. try to look at the other side of the story, search for "loose change debunked" or other search terms like this, and try to find out what real experts say.

do your research or stay stupid.

[resistance0311]

Uhum , do research or stay stupid , right right .

=ezIU6ZxYU3A

[resistance0311]

" and try to find out what real experts say. "

Which ones ? Those on government pay role or those who actually didn't followed official line and got fired ?

[kurtilein3]

maybe scientists that dont even live in the united states?

maybe ask some skeptics, some anthropologists, some architects, some engineers, that are not part of the US government and also not part of the deluded conspiracy-theory crowd, people that can look at this independently without much emotional strings attacked because they live on different continents?

[resistance0311]

Trusting those " official " line " experts " and government in whole is just like , if sheep is missing you ask wolfs what happened ?

The 9/11 commission was conducted by government and never allowed independent investigation (I wonder why ? ), you expect they will find themselves guilty ?

Give me those " experts " and I will give you opposing experts 10:1 . By the way those " debunkers " got many times debunked but I guess you didn't receive the memo ?!

Oufiderzain

[kurtilein3]

"By the way those " debunkers " got many times debunked"

prove it, send me links in a PM to a good debunking of loose change, and then a good debunking of the debunking. or something like that. i would like to see it. im sure you can research this and send me some good examples, i would like to know if there are problems with the stuff i watched a few years ago and still consider to be valid.

back this up with links that make sense. should be easy, if you are not a liar.

[TheLogicaLParty]

I just watch this again.Thanks again for the lesson. you did wake me up to a new level of skepticism, i appreciate it.

[workingclasssociety]

very good english... nice work. I like to hear other people opinions. Thanks for contributing.

[kswatcher]

lol, I was just thinking the same thing. He does have very similar facial features.

[Brinkman911]

What's so strange about this is that you talk about the laws of logic and science in a seemingly educated way, and then suddenly come up with a demand that for a thing to be proven untrue a COMPLETE alternative theory has to be produced. It is the argument of a creationist, how bizarre.

It's like saying a person can't have commited suicide because there were some obvious evidence to the contrary, but it cannot be accepted until you have proved in every detail how the person was murdered..

[EternalSceptic]

Sounds like kurtilein3 is not a skeptic. Obviously, if kurtilein3 was any kind of skeptic, which he isn't, he'd tell us how Minetta's testimony supports the official narrative. Why can't kurtilein3 debunk this? #1 kurtelien3 is not a skeptic and #2 Mineta'a testimony directly contradicts what the official story says. Mineta has Cheney in the PEOC approving orders on an aircraft coming into the Pentagon. The official story has so many versions, but yet kurtilein3 supports it.

[kurtilein3]

eternalskeptic:

one contradiction doesnt help. you need a better story.

you need what you claim to have: a theory. a story that makes more sense than the official one. and when you THEN debunk the official story, people will maybe turn to your theory.

but if you just debunk the official story, people will just turn agnostic. after all, you dont know what happened, so how should they know what happened just because you pointed out a contradiction?

[EternalSceptic]

So using the scientific method, tell me how you know Bin Laden is alive?

[Obelisk2290]

truthers claim they are just asking question but they dont like the answers

[kurtilein3]

they are not interested in answers, and they know that they do not want to hear them, but they keep asking the same questions. its really strange. and everyone that knows the answers to their questions and attempts to tell them about it is automatically part of the conspiracy.

[Obelisk2290]

you mean you are not getting paid from the bailout to be a government shill

[dontinducevomiting]

unfortunately achiver cannot answer you,you have blocked access,

so i created this id just to expose your tactics & hypocracy,

u r the intellectual fraud,cannot allow any discussion of the real causes of terror,in this regard youre much like criminally complicit us media,

you win by not allowing others a voice , typically fascist and quite transparent

zionist terror has a long sordid history

you participate in the murder of innocent civilians thru you deceptive activities on you tube

[kurtilein3]

hi achiver911, i dont like the fact that you use two accounts, so i just deleted all the spam-comments that you left with your old account, archiver911. when you keep making the same orthographic mistakes with both accounts, archiver911, and when your new account was created december 21, then you really need to be stupid if you think that anyone would fall for it.

you were blocked because you are a spammer, not because i am part of the conspiracy.

[GetMeThere1]

Have you had a rabies shot lately?

[GetMeThere1]

Right...

Get back to me when Bush cancels the transfer of power (to a black guy with no previous connection to power!), on January 19.

Then perhaps I'll give some credence to your paranoia.

[GetMeThere1]

Believers in 911 conspiracies (especially those imagining Govt agents actually planting bombs, etc.) are fools. Two simple reasons:

1) Where will you FIND groups of Americans who will kill thousands of innocent Americans for political reasons? How will you SEARCH for them without asking some WRONG people, who will report the search.

2) It is AGAINST HUMAN NATURE to have a large conspiracy without someone admitting involvement. Kill all the conspirators? Then the killers tell THEIR story.

[magichandpuppet]

I wasn't part of this conversation from the beginning... but, when you say someone is or isn't a skeptic... it is can alway be "debunked" unless you state To What they are a skeptic with. Simply saying someone is or isn't a skeptic is a complete waste of time and a weak statement.

[KANDESA]

your are BIG BIG IDI OT!!!

bombs was in other buildings levels

do some study's about building demolition - then you will won't have such stupid questions why bombs blow up when building was fallen

sorry man

but you are BIG IDIOT!!!

[KANDESA]

kurtilein3 - you are IDI OT

watch?v=8n-nT-luFIw

[kurtilein3]

this is nonsense. if there were bombs in the buildings, how did the bombs survive hours of fire? fireproof bombs? bombs that can withstand the conditions that can cause steel to soften?

and then... all the supposed evidence of bomb explosions shows those explosions after the buildings are already falling. the explosions should be before the buildings start falling.

pure nonsense.

[LUKAvac2]

thermite ?? yes.

watch?v=o20GnNmumYo

what is that? tell me what that can be? please

[erdal0]

well i believe in the zionist new world order

and to give you a example you cant answer is: 10% of the people who worked in the WTC who happend to be jewish, were not present on 9/11 in the wtc. NOT ONE NOT ONE jew died on 9/11

from this i conclude that the jewish mossad had to do with 9/11.

This makes perfectly sence because the jewish banks made profit of the war in the present and wars to come.

jewish lobbyist in the senate can take more freedoms away of the public

here you go

[erdal0]

here is your theory!

[kurtilein3]

this is just a lie, many jews dies inside the buildings. its a very stupid lie, not even creative, so only uneducated people that are unable to really use their brain believe in it.

but even if this nonsense would be true, it wouldnt be a theory. you still need to explain what exactly happened on that day, how they did it.

[erdal0]

omg your confused.

basicly your saying everything you cant proof is not true. we can never observe the BIG BANG thats why its called a theory, its the same with this. its nothing to do with creativity or fairytales, its just observed FACTSSZZZ

[kurtilein3]

its not a theory, because theories provide explanation, and have to be consistent with all the facts.

you are throwing around facts. you dont have a theory. you dont even explain why the buildings fell, and what happened to the airplanes, and who/what was in the airplanes that hit the towers, stuff like this.

you just throw around random facts, mixed with lies, and then you jump to the conclusion that you impressed anyone, but you didnt. you just made yourself look stupid.

[erdal0]

your really really confused

what kind of facts do you want? i cant film the bigbang like i cant film how they planned this. We can only observe and use logic to match the theory to reality!

the fact that the media is owned by jews and censor everything that they dont like and covered up how many jews died is enough, look at my first comment. its impossible that not one jew died. even the israelly press confirmed that not one jew died

[erdal0]

and you really need to stop to pretend your right with words (because you look like a asshole) like random facts(because its not) mixed lies??? jumping to conclussions??? what conclussion? your only trowwing words at me because you cant debate

[toxaz00]

Versuchs mal mit Loose Change und deren Behauptungen bezüglich der Explosionen der einzelnen Häuser.

Das ist eine anerkannte Theorie.

[kurtilein3]

loose change is nonsense.

quite a lot of the claims in those movies have been debunked.

[conotoxin]

Danke sehr! Mensch! I don't know if we agree on other points, but we agree in LC. I haven't addressed many of the points rigorously, but others have done so. The only one I focused on was the Mike Walters interview. I got his permission to post a complete copy of his interview to prove what LC was saying about him was a bald faced lie.

[Eyrdal]

What exactly did he say?

[toxaz00]

Ich denke du siehst das ganze etwas zu einfach. Man kann sogar skeptisch gegenüber den offiziellen Theorien und gegenüber den "Verschwörungstheorien" zur selben Zeit sein, sich sein eigenes Bild machen, Nachforschen und leider zu einem anderen Bild kommen als es die offizielle Version sagt.

Wie du sagtest gibt es Tonnen von Verschwörungstheorien. Ganz abstruse, aber auch fundierte: Die weniger verschwörerisch sind; sondern eben einfach: Skeptisch.

[criticalwisdom]

cosmiczen you should be ashamed of yourself shilling for mass murderers , what the hell in wrong with you , im skeptical of you!!!

[BoStevoD]

I must say, I am VERY glad to see a video like this here on YouTube. I have dealt with conspiracy theorists my whole life. My family is, unfortunately, full of them. They are dangerous people, and their slanderous attitude towards "reality" is not conducive to a healthy society.

[capelipl]

israel is a lawless assassin filled catbox

the source of most modern terror

she is a rotting albatross around a dying americas neck , guess what needs to be done

[kurtilein3]

well, in this case two things need to be done:

1.: people like you need to be educated, and people need to be made aware that people like you have a lack of education.

2.: people like you, that believe in stupid things, need to be kept from doing stupid things, and people need to know that idiotic beliefs can have consequences.

[achiver911]

i make the same claim,in fact.

stupid? 3 buildings fell due to controlled 911 demolition? this is supported by visual evidance,debris field temps,& myrad other observations

your 7 year old dogma is not.

what is dangerous about looking at history,& linking ciamossad? history supports me, not you

further,

there is a real danger to civilians in new attacks emboldened by the percieved sucess of the 911 falseflag op

kurtleins foolish support of ziofascists has the worst potential of all.

[capelipl]

2 things need to done

1.usa has to stop control of politics & media by zionists.achieved by doing their constitutional duty of prosicuting treason & felony crimes. de-infiltrate fbi,cia & pentagon

2.the consiquences, apologizing for falseflag murderers, kurtlein3`s hobby,

IS participation in mass murder.

the danger you pose by attacks on citizen awareness,attempt to mock inquiry at a critical juncture in history is injurous to humanity, putting peace freedom and privacy at severe risk

[capelipl]

one thing you have never explained ,kurtlein3is why the opinions of the us government and the israeli government and their respective propiganda media apparatus is the default position of truth on the 911 mass murder event ?

how on earth can you claim skepticism when you have made up your mind on 911 siding with american fascists and israeli militarists?

i await your answer, a real answer, not the vague musings i am frankly tired of , to the question i just posed?

[mattfox06]

They don't need to construct one specific theory. They are simply pointing out that parts of the official theory are not true or are suspicious and worth looking into independently.

[kurtilein3]

mattfox06:

because the official theory is supported by tons of evidence, and because the conspiracy-theories are not backed up by any evidence, and because you can make up an infinite amount of stories that are not backed up by evidence, just pointing out little flaws in the official story wont work. you still need a specific story, and then you need to support it with evidence.

logic does not work that way, your thinking has some logical flaws.

[mattfox06]

I know someone who is skeptical of practically everything except his own religion.

[capelipl]

govt story of 911 r most likeintelligent design,a premise without evidance video or wreckage to explain it.

911 truths more like the science behind evol.

you fail to mention that darwin had no idea what mechanisms caused variation selection etc, he proposed no grand questionas you say we must.

you think a theory of gravity exists, it does not! to suggest that a single question must go forth in the search for truth shows a deep misunderstanding of how science works

911 deserve inquiry

[mattfox06]

You might as well have typed that in your first language. If you did, maybe someone would be able to understand it.

[HashyBee]

Perception changes everything.

One man's truth is another man's lie, one man's passion is another man's fear.

So really, you're WHOLE ARGUEMENT falls apart the moment you say, he isn't X, because, you can't have something be true and false at the same time.

Ok in the purest sense of logic and fact, that is the case. And where is truth exactly?

It's decided by the individual. So he may be a skeptic. And that word can define him to an extent. But maybe on YOUR ISSUE, he is not skeptical.

[HashyBee]

r skeptical enough for your tastes. So you say, ah ha!! He doesn't think like me, he's a skeptic.

Well that's utter bullshit.

Can you see how I destroyed your argument?

Or should I go on.

Think that through next time. Yes, I do understand logic. Do you understand perception? And "degrees" of truth"?

[mattfox06]

You are trying to make the point that truth is subjective and just stumbling over your own words. It looks like a three year-old wrote your comment. Get to the fucking point.

[HashyBee]

Wow. I was trying to make it very clear. Especially because there may have been language issues. You're a fucking baby. Look at what you wrote towards me before you ever asses my intelligence or maturity again you fucking Neanderthal looking European grease ball.

[mattfox06]

At least learn to spell before you talk shit about my intelligence, you fucking weak cunt.

[8bitZomB1E]

@HashyBee ....lol

[8bitZomB1E]

@HashyBee ...the irony!

[HashyBee]

@8bitZomB1E LOL!

[8bitZomB1E]

@HashyBee ... hey man.. am curious .. what's your stance on the 911 terror attack?

[HashyBee]

@8bitZomB1E I think it's foolish to trust the government blindly, and even dumber to trust Alex Jones. What I do know is that many truthers think as a group and attack me for defending vaccines(older ones) that have saved millions of lives. It's like this truther culture has formed and instead of being skeptics they're like some of the sheep they're mocking. I loathe Alex Jones and people like him. He makes real threats like banking powers look silly to the uneducated, because he is a fool,

[HashyBee]

@HashyBee Open debate, and skepticism, or what's the point? You can't bring up evidence with many of these people, if you do you work for some group, honestly I don't respect the intelligence of many of them

[HashyBee]

Most of what truthers say is paranoid, baseless, nonsense. Do I know what happened on 9/11? Not exactly. But terrorists DID ATTACK, at most, the CIA maybe let them slip through to justify a war. I really doubt all the other claims. 

[yerdyyyyy]

Sorry for the typo. That's 'History channel 9-11 Myths'

[yerdyyyyy]

Please go to 'History channel 9-11 myhts' I think MmRytv has it and others. It goes through each claim made by the conspiracies and answers and debunks them one by one with scientists experts and facts. I saw this on television like a year ago. Check it out guys. It will adress all your queries.

[893Productions]

every once in a while "conspiracy theories" have truth to them. in the case of 9/11, there is little to no evidence that is not highly circumstantial for these so called truthers. that said looking at conspiracies like the US goverment testing drugs on soldiers you only need to look to MK Ultra. the CIA's involvement in drug pushing also seems to have a lot of weight to it.

[mattfox06]

Thats not really a conspiracy theory. Everyone knows drugs are tested on soldiers.

[dechha1981]

Nah nah nah nah, The Moon Landing was mainly about beating the Russians. If The Americans did fake the moon landing, the Russians would've been the first ones to call their bluff. The Russians were well aware of everything the Americans were doing. So were we. In fact, WE were the ones who re-broadcast the signal from the moon to the rest of the world.

[kurtilein3]

dechha1981: you are correct about this, this is why moonlanding conspiracy theories dont make sense.

[dechha1981]

Australians can't believe that a government can be bad, Really. He said that. He honestly thinks that we are not well aware that bunch of complete lying assholes in Canberra are capable of sending our troops to die because of some idiot redneck so he can fight another group of religious fanatics over who's invisible freind has the biggest dick.

Trust me, we can imagine that politicians are less than perfect.

[dechha1981]

Whever said that you have no right to say he's not a skeptic;

I disagree.

I think Conspiracy Theorists are an insult to the word "Skeptic". They CALL themselves "Skeptics" but they ignore Occum's Razor.And they're at least as narrow-minded as Creationists.

[Belle19700]

I think the 911 conspiracy theorists are doing the best that they can with the evidence that they have. They cannot work with others nation-wide, if they don't tell what they they think to others. Most of the theories are not backed up, but many are intrigueing. I wish the theorists would say more plainly that this is what they "think," rather than presenting their theories as fact, beacause we all know they are not.

[kurtilein3]

belle19700: as long as they keep making up evidence, and use quote-mining, and create strawmans, and display all signs of intellectual dishonesty, why should i trust them?

all those conspiracy theorists ever come up with gets debunked, just like creationism. as long as they dont improve their record (their record so far: complete, universal failure) i will continue to oppose them and expose them.

[Belle19700]

I wish I could find that video of the Canadian lawyer talking about this. He is the man who said they were removing gold from the towers the day before the hit, and also saying that only the top men in the country could get defense forces to stand down. He was really intelligent, an American lawyer in Canada for some reason. Anyway, I won't believe this was an inside job until someone comes up with better evidence, because it's cruel to tell us that it "is" an inside job without good evidence.

[sumadartsan]

Being skeptical about an issue doesn't not mean you try to debunk it. From a philosophical standpoint, being skeptical means that you reserve judgement. You are basically being open minded. So, in terms of 9/11 conspiracy theories, being a skeptic means that you do not automatically dismiss them, nor automatically accept the official story. Since the information about 9/11 is not complete for anyone, you have to stay on the fence to be a true skeptic.

[sumadartsan]

CONT: That being said, there is a substantial amount of evidence against the government. Thus, if you are a true skeptic, you must conclude that it is at least a possibility that the government (that is, a small faction of it) is culpable in some way. If you have the conclusion that it is impossible, then you are not really a skeptic from the philosophical perspective since there is a mountain of evidence, and incomplete information.

[sumadartsan]

CONT: If you said something to the effect that given the evidence and what I understand about the events of 9/11 I don't believe a government conspiracy is probable, I could respect your claim to skepticism much more. However, if you don't keep the possibility of a government conspiracy open despite not having full information, then from a philosophical perspective what you actually have is pseudo-skepticism.

[kurtilein3]

``That being said, there is a substantial amount of evidence against the government.´´

this is a lie. the conspiracy theorists have nothing except fallacious arguments, quote-mined and made up evidence. they are just spreading lies and setting up strawman-fallacies. they have to be dismissed, because they are intellectually dishonest, after all those lies they have been spreading its time to call them liars and ignore them.

and you are a liar too, unless you can come up with some good evidence

[sumadartsan]

"and you are a liar too, unless you can come up with some good evidence" I've stated that I don't have complete information to state definitively either way and it seems like there is good evidence against the government. You may disagree with the quality of a lot of the evidence, but since I don't have complete information I have to say that I'm not really sure. How can someone who says they don't know or are not sure be called a liar?

[sumadartsan]

However, you are dead set on what you think is the truth, despite the fact that you lack complete information. You may be totally right on the issue, but to claim you know 100% that all evidence against the government is false I think is dishonest. For example, you claim the fires automatically prevent explosives from being in the building. How do you know? Are you an explosives expert? No such thing as fireproofing? It is a good argument against explosives, but far from definitive.

[yrrmom]

I don't mean to be critical, but helpful: When you use the word "unrelated" in this vid, I think you must mean "irrelevant". For example, when you say that Watergate is "unrelated", I think you mean that it's irrelevant - i.e. even if Rumsfeld was involved in Watergate, that doesn't really prove anything about 911. (Technically, I think you can allow that it's *related*; but you're right if you mean that it's not relevant to whether the 911-truthers are correct.)

[kurtilein3]

yes, maybe you are right and the word ``irrelevant´´ would have been a better choice than ``unrelated´´, that caused some confusion in the comments.

[MeIoco]

Sory Kurt, I had to 1 star this one, I'll try to make a video responce when I get home.

[neotropic9]

You can say he agrees with the philosophy of skepticism but is not great at being a skeptic. In any case people use the term 'skeptic' differently. Michael Shermer said that a skeptic should doubt global warming. I am a skeptic but I think Shermer is dead wrong on this issue. He might say that I am not a skeptic for this reason. It's not his right to do so, though. I am a skeptic. But I disagree with Shermer on the point about global warming.

[cozmikzen]

i'm glad you are responding. i am open to be corrected. And, i will check out the video, and your 2nd part.

i think just because i have an opinion doesnt make me non-skeptical. i have after all, more than once gave you opportunity to change my mind. i am anxious to see the video.

let me ask u this, if i just agreed with you blindly against all what i have seen, how would that make me a skeptic?

also, just because something is labeled conspiracy theory doesnt automatically make it not true.

[kurtilein3]

i can completely agree with your comment :)

i hope this time the information i present will be enough to cause you to seriously doubt the validity of the claims brought forward by conspiracy theorists ;)

[kurtilein3]

i will post this as a video-response as soon as youtube allows me to do this, i need to wait until the video shows up in the list so that i can select it.

the noam chomsky videos in the description-box are really great.