| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
lumpymunk Forum Leader


Joined: 17 Feb 2007 Posts: 1902 Local time: 10:28 PM
|
Posted: Wed Nov 14, 2007 8:50 pm Post subject: 9/11 - Debate Request |
|
|
1) It doesn't matter to me who I debate.
2) Who moderates these?
3) Should we confine the topic to some single aspect about 9/11 or go all out into every little detail?
4) How will the end of the debate be established?
Maybe an "Overview" sticky would help... but I am eager to begin this with whoever is willing. _________________ "Pass that Bowl of shitcocks my way please." ~Moloth
What is Atheism? |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
|
|
 |
Klarky Bag of Mostly Water

Joined: 12 Jan 2004 Posts: 616 Local time: 3:28 AM Location: FunkyTown

|
Posted: Wed Nov 14, 2007 9:25 pm Post subject: |
|
|
You could always ask Reggie to set one up and do it live? _________________ That which can be asserted without evidence can also be dismissed without evidence. ~ Christopher Hitchens
Anarchism is simply the revolutionary idea that no-one is better qualified to run your life than you are.
Atheist Community | Myspace Music page |
Youtube |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
lumpymunk Forum Leader


Joined: 17 Feb 2007 Posts: 1902 Local time: 10:28 PM
|
Posted: Wed Nov 14, 2007 9:28 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Live discussions are skimpy, if we're going to do this right it's going to be in point for point paragraph format and moderated. _________________ "Pass that Bowl of shitcocks my way please." ~Moloth
What is Atheism? |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Philosophos The owls are not what they seem

Joined: 01 Mar 2004 Posts: 9106 Local time: 11:28 PM Location: The Black Lodge
|
Posted: Wed Nov 14, 2007 11:17 pm Post subject: Re: 9/11 - Debate Request |
|
|
| lumpymunk wrote: | | 1) It doesn't matter to me who I debate. |
K
| Quote: | | 2) Who moderates these? |
Any mod or admin who you invite and who accepts.
| Quote: | | 3) Should we confine the topic to some single aspect about 9/11 or go all out into every little detail? |
The specific rules are up to the two debators alone. The moderator will only enforce the rules that they lay out.
| Quote: | | 4) How will the end of the debate be established? |
See the answer to number 3.
| Quote: | | Maybe an "Overview" sticky would help... but I am eager to begin this with whoever is willing. |
That's a good idea. I'll make one soon. _________________ Every day, once a day, give yourself a present. Don't plan it, don't wait for it, just… let it happen. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
RyanDzundza Sock Puppet

Joined: 19 Sep 2007 Posts: 4427 Local time: 3:28 AM Location: Manchester

|
Posted: Thu Nov 15, 2007 8:33 am Post subject: |
|
|
it might be best if you state whether you believe it was an inside job or you think all the conspiracy theories are false
otherwise you may end up debating against someone who agrees with you, and that would be a short debate _________________
Atheist/Religious Dialog Board |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
BarkAtTheMoon DILLIGAF

Joined: 20 Dec 2004 Posts: 4330 Local time: 11:28 PM Location: Wilmington, DE

|
Posted: Thu Nov 15, 2007 2:35 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I guess I can step up on this one if you really want to do this, if for no other reason than to be the first debate in the new section, and I've been one of the primary anti-conspiracy posters in the 9/11 threads.
| RyanDzundza wrote: | it might be best if you state whether you believe it was an inside job or you think all the conspiracy theories are false
otherwise you may end up debating against someone who agrees with you, and that would be a short debate |
Lumpy is pro-conspiracy. Although it might actually be more interesting, educational, and fun to argue the counter argument.
| Quote: | | 3) Should we confine the topic to some single aspect about 9/11 or go all out into every little detail? |
Doesn't matter to me. It's bound to drift to different aspects, but it might make things simpler to start with something specific.
| Quote: | | 4) How will the end of the debate be established? |
Not sure. You've said that you don't have an answer or evidence for what you think did happen, so I'm not sure what you're looking to accomplish other than to continue to try and poke holes of doubt in the generally accepted story of the events.
I'm not especially interested in doing a particularly formal style debate, more like a back and forth conversational type thread. I don't really have the time to write up long arguments and rebuttals reports.
My general position is that while the US government, through underestimated or ignored intelligence, complacency, and the legacy of a Cold War era air defense system meant to protect against outside threats, rightfully deserves a share of the blame for allowing 9/11 to happen and the failure to protect its citizens, the attacks of 9/11 were perpetrated by a group of well-financed, highly motivated Islamic terrorists of mostly Saudi descent by means of hijacking airplanes and crashing them into US landmark buildings. And while every little detail of what happened isn't entirely understood, especially considering the enormous level of destruction in New York, the evidence points to the damage to the buildings in question being entirely due to the impacts of these planes and subsequent fires, and in the case of the surrounding buildings in New York due to the collapse of the trade center towers. Furthermore, there is no definitive evidence that the US government or any other organization was directly involved in the planning, financing (outside of maybe Muslim "charities" and organizations that funnel funds to terrorist groups), or execution of the plot. _________________ "The very existence of flame throwers proves that some time, somewhere, someone said to themselves, 'You know, I want to set those people over there on fire, but I'm just not close enough to get the job done.' - George Carlin
"I hope that someday we will be able to put away our fears and prejudices and just laugh at people." - Deep Thoughts by Jack Handey |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
lumpymunk Forum Leader


Joined: 17 Feb 2007 Posts: 1902 Local time: 10:28 PM
|
Posted: Thu Nov 15, 2007 11:23 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I propose we limit the discussion to the Pentagon.
I would like to invite either ChaosLord or Philosophos, or both to moderate the discussion, or any Admin who's willing. Volunteers welcome, and appreciated.
I propose that all logical fallacies be avoided, including especially straw man arguments and ad hominem attacks... Moderators will contact those in violation via PM and the person guilty will retract the statement. Parody of reasoning and reductio arguments must be thoroughly demonstrated. (I.e., simply comparing me to a creationist will not stand unless you validate why that is an accurate comparison in detail.) I'm not the most knowledgeable about logical fallacies, but I would like mods to be as critical as possible about them.
I propose the the discussion continue until one participant yields to the other or chooses not to participate any longer.
No time frame is necessary. Posts can be as random and dispersed as you want, no pressure to grind this out quickly.
Anything you would like to add/modify to this framework?
If not, then I await a Mod to volunteer, and we'll begin. _________________ "Pass that Bowl of shitcocks my way please." ~Moloth
What is Atheism? |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
BarkAtTheMoon DILLIGAF

Joined: 20 Dec 2004 Posts: 4330 Local time: 11:28 PM Location: Wilmington, DE

|
Posted: Fri Nov 16, 2007 3:07 pm Post subject: |
|
|
That's fine. I don't think Chaos is still around here anymore, but if Philosophos or one of the other regular mods still around wants to do this I have no objection.
Before we start, I want to confirm that you are going to argue the position that what actually hit the Pentagon was a cruise missile, as you stated in the other thread, so I know what to base my counter arguments on. Also, can we at least agree that the frames that were released video of the impact from the Pentagon security camera, whether there was a frame or two removed or not, are undoctored and legitimate images of the 9/11 impact and fireball?
I guess we can just continue in this thread rather than starting a new one. Maybe if you or a mod could change the subject line to something more specific. I'll try and do a little research this weekend and get something written next week before Thanksgiving. From Thanksgiving I'll probably be out until the next Tuesday. _________________ "The very existence of flame throwers proves that some time, somewhere, someone said to themselves, 'You know, I want to set those people over there on fire, but I'm just not close enough to get the job done.' - George Carlin
"I hope that someday we will be able to put away our fears and prejudices and just laugh at people." - Deep Thoughts by Jack Handey |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
lumpymunk Forum Leader


Joined: 17 Feb 2007 Posts: 1902 Local time: 10:28 PM
|
Posted: Sun Nov 25, 2007 5:06 am Post subject: |
|
|
**waiting on an admin volunteer**
| Quote: |
Before we start, I want to confirm that you are going to argue the position that what actually hit the Pentagon was a cruise missile, as you stated in the other thread, so I know what to base my counter arguments on.
|
My argument is that I don't know what did hit the pentagon. I think I can deductively eliminate the possibility that what hit the pentagon was a plane the size they claim, and provide some evidence that suggests that a cruise missile or some kind of smaller air craft with explosives on board was used.
| Quote: |
Also, can we at least agree that the frames that were released video of the impact from the Pentagon security camera, whether there was a frame or two removed or not, are undoctored and legitimate images of the 9/11 impact and fireball?
|
I'm afraid we can't. The only reference I plan on making to them is how little it shows us. _________________ "Pass that Bowl of shitcocks my way please." ~Moloth
What is Atheism? |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Ivan_Ivanov Administrator


Joined: 15 Jun 2004 Posts: 3623 Local time: 5:28 AM Location: Poland
|
Posted: Sun Nov 25, 2007 5:09 am Post subject: |
|
|
| lumpymunk wrote: | | **waiting on an admin volunteer** |
Oh damn, sorry, I thought that was taken care of.
I'll gladly do it. _________________
It is as though your species' brain is too small to hold a simple thought such as, WE WILL KILL YOU FOR DISOBEYING!
This is not a complex idea.
The LOVE SHACK. Friendly, civil, heavily moderated... coming to a forum near you. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
lumpymunk Forum Leader


Joined: 17 Feb 2007 Posts: 1902 Local time: 10:28 PM
|
Posted: Sun Nov 25, 2007 7:30 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I think it would be instructive to agree on the official story.
| Quote: |
AA Flight 77, a Boeing 757, took off from Dulles Airport in northern Virginia at 8:10 a.m bound for Los Angeles, with between 50 and 58 passengers. It flew west for about 45 minutes, making a curious detour to the north, west and south, before turning around and flying for another 45 minutes back to Washington.
AA 77 approached the Pentagon it executed a 270-degree 7,000-foot descent (Flow by Hani Hanjour) over Washington while flying at 500 mph. It approached the Pentagon on a horizontal trajectory so low that it clipped the power lines across the street then it smashed into an outer wall of the Pentagon.
|
NTSB Docs..
http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/NSAEBB/NSAEBB196/doc02.pdf
http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/NSAEBB/NSAEBB196/doc06.pdf
Anything you would like to add? _________________ "Pass that Bowl of shitcocks my way please." ~Moloth
What is Atheism? |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
cheapsuprise disgraced, in exile.

Joined: 25 Apr 2004 Posts: 7046 Local time: 7:28 PM Location: Next door.
|
Posted: Sun Nov 25, 2007 8:35 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Lumpy, one thing.
This is completely up to you and BarkAtTheMoon, as to how you want to handle it, but when you ask that the moderator be critical of fallacies do you intend to leave that up to the moderator to watch for, or do you intend to PM a complaint once you notice one?
The reason I ask, is that it's possible that a complaint will be contested. _________________ "-- Upon this a question arises: whether it be better to be loved than
feared or feared than loved? It may be answered that one should wish to
be both, but, because it is difficult to unite them in one person, it
is much safer to be feared than loved, when, of the two, either must be
dispensed with."-- Niccolò Machiavelli |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
lumpymunk Forum Leader


Joined: 17 Feb 2007 Posts: 1902 Local time: 10:28 PM
|
Posted: Sun Nov 25, 2007 8:36 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| lumpymunk wrote: | | I'm not the most knowledgeable about logical fallacies, but I would like mods to be as critical as possible about them. |
_________________ "Pass that Bowl of shitcocks my way please." ~Moloth
What is Atheism? |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
cheapsuprise disgraced, in exile.

Joined: 25 Apr 2004 Posts: 7046 Local time: 7:28 PM Location: Next door.
|
Posted: Sun Nov 25, 2007 9:01 pm Post subject: |
|
|
So, you except the possibility of having to post a retraction on a fallacy that you did not actualy commit? _________________ "-- Upon this a question arises: whether it be better to be loved than
feared or feared than loved? It may be answered that one should wish to
be both, but, because it is difficult to unite them in one person, it
is much safer to be feared than loved, when, of the two, either must be
dispensed with."-- Niccolò Machiavelli |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
lumpymunk Forum Leader


Joined: 17 Feb 2007 Posts: 1902 Local time: 10:28 PM
|
Posted: Sun Nov 25, 2007 9:35 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I expect the possibility of retractions to occur when one commits a fallacy one wasn't previously aware of. Regardless of your awareness of the fallacious tactic employed, it's still fallacious and still "actually being committed." Intentions are irrelevant. _________________ "Pass that Bowl of shitcocks my way please." ~Moloth
What is Atheism? |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
|
|
|