Bill Maher might be in Trouble (1 Viewer)

[Ford Prefect]

yup thats the man. I accidentally stumbled upon a you tube vid saying that it has evidence that Bush senior is a reptile. I thought it was some kind of parody vid... i was surprised that i was wrong.... so i checked the comments and it was full of people who actually believe this stuff to be true. Whenever someone told them that they are nuts ... they all told him to check the evidence, research the subject and wake up... as if we the non-reptile believers are nuts and they were sane.


felt like i was in zombie land

I dont want to start a fight with andy, but that is how i feel about 9/11 truthers.

 

Buy on AliExpress.com

[X Æ A-12]

I dont want to start a fight with andy, but that is how i feel about 9/11 truthers.

 

[Hist]

so you believe 911 is a conspiracy or you dont?

 

[swag]

this is too offensive, I want to kill him.

so you believe 911 is a conspiracy or you dont?

Yes. Just like the Holocaust, it never happened.

All that video of the World Trade Center towers falling? Faked -- just like the moon landings.

 

[Ford Prefect]

so you believe 911 is a conspiracy or you dont?

I dont, there isnt a single truther argument that cant be taken down.

 

[Quetzalcoatl]

I'm not in the mood now, but I would love to see you do it sometime.

 

[Ford Prefect]

I'm not in the mood now, but I would love to see you do it sometime.

do what? i didnt claim i could do anything.

 

[Quetzalcoatl]

"Take down" the "truther arguments."

 

[Lawnchair Bes]

i take it you guys wish to argue about this as well?

 

[Quetzalcoatl]

You guys go ahead, I'll just watch. Unless you're on the same side.

 

[Ford Prefect]

"Take down" the "truther arguments."

oh right so you have taken something i have said and then decided it doesn't mean what i said. I said i dont believe in truther arguments as they could all be taken down. Case in point the second by second debunking of loose change, which disprooves everything (with evidence unlike what loose change provides) in loose change. I didnt say anything about what i could do. So don't put words in my mouth. And seriously i don't want to talk about 9/11 or obama or swine flu, took me long enough to get on with andy, i dont want to kick it all off again. So mg do me a favour and dont put words in my mouth and bait me.

 

[Lawnchair Bes]

You guys go ahead, I'll just watch. Unless you're on the same side.

the funny thing is, i think everyone is on the same side

 

[Ford Prefect]

the funny thing is, i think everyone is on the same side

I think we are all on the side of the truth, we just have different definitions of what that truth is.

 

[X Æ A-12]

the funny thing is, i think everyone is on the same side

How so?

 

[Quetzalcoatl]

I really thought that's what you meant, sorry. Anyway, I find the "truther" arguments better and haven't seen them debunked. And I did look for the debunkers.

 

[Lawnchair Bes]

How so?

surely people who think that there was something other than a bunch of plans that made those towers fall can't be smart enough to use a computer, can they?

 

[Ford Prefect]

I really thought that's what you meant, sorry. Anyway, I find the "truther" arguments better and haven't seen them debunked. And I did look for the debunkers.

http://911research.wtc7.net/reviews/loose_change/index.html

Theres a link to one of the many debunks of loose change.

The one argument that gets at me the most is the one about melting the steel structure. The structure didnt need to melt for it to collapse, it just had to be weakened and jet fuel gets to the temp that it can weaken steal to the point where the ammount of weight that was on it, it would have collapsed. That is fact. The difference between truth arguments and post revisionist arguments is that the truth arguments are based on circumstancial evidence and the post revisionists base theres on debunking the circumstnacial elements of the evidence. I am sure we all have lots to say on the subject, but thats where im leaving it.

 

[X Æ A-12]

surely people who think that there was something other than a bunch of plans that made those towers fall can't be smart enough to use a computer, can they?

The internet used to have that luxury until apple started marketing computers towards these people.

 

[Ford Prefect]

surely people who think that there was something other than a bunch of plans that made those towers fall can't be smart enough to use a computer, can they?

The internet used to have that luxury until apple started marketing computers towards these people.

You two are asking for an argument! Can i point out now that i have no intention of getting into this argument, i may have bought the subject up but dont blame me when shit hits the fan, because i made it clear when i bought it up i didnt want this debate again.

 

[Quetzalcoatl]

surely people who think that there was something other than a bunch of plans that made those towers fall can't be smart enough to use a computer, can they?

It's a miracle I've made it this far, and I'm glad I can be in the presence of Jasper, Bes and Kyle who can enlighten me.

http://911research.wtc7.net/reviews/loose_change/index.html

Theres a link to one of the many debunks of loose change.

The one argument that gets at me the most is the one about melting the steel structure. The structure didnt need to melt for it to collapse, it just had to be weakened and jet fuel gets to the temp that it can weaken steal to the point where the ammount of weight that was on it, it would have collapsed. That is fact. The difference between truth arguments and post revisionist arguments is that the truth arguments are based on circumstancial evidence and the post revisionists base theres on debunking the circumstnacial elements of the evidence. I am sure we all have lots to say on the subject, but thats where im leaving it.

Never saw Loose Change, but I'll check out that link there in a while. After I go study my Computers For Dummies book.