• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

New Conspiracy Theorist tactics...[W:34,46]

Fledermaus

Fledermaus

DP Veteran
Joined
Apr 18, 2014
Messages
121,406
Reaction score
32,415
Location
Peoples Republic of California AKA Taxifornia
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian - Right
Recent trend....

CT : I can prove X happened.
Poster: Do you have any sources or citation for that?
CT: Google it.
Poster: It is your claim, back it up.
CT: I already gave sources (untrue). I am not going to source anything else. I don't have to source.
 
Re: New Conspiracy Theorist tactics...

Fledermaus said:
Recent trend....

CT : I can prove X happened.
Poster: Do you have any sources or citation for that?
CT: Google it.
Poster: It is your claim, back it up.
CT: I already gave sources (untrue). I am not going to source anything else. I don't have to source.
Click to expand...

They seem incapable of stating anything in their own words.
 
Re: New Conspiracy Theorist tactics...

I wouldn't exactly call that new.
 
Re: New Conspiracy Theorist tactics...

We just want to share the info that we've found with the people who seriously want to see it.

http://www.debatepolitics.com/consp...-never-before-seen-photos.html#post1064863626
http://www.debatepolitics.com/consp...w-823-852-1124-1449-a-143.html#post1064954107


Anybody who wants to see it can click on the links and see it.


You don't exactly help your credibility when you respond to it like this.
http://www.debatepolitics.com/consp...e-w-823-852-1124-1449-a-2.html#post1063453818


That response would get you laughed out of the debating hall.
 
Last edited:
Re: New Conspiracy Theorist tactics...

Scott said:
We just want to share the info that we've found with the people who seriously want to see it.

http://www.debatepolitics.com/consp...-never-before-seen-photos.html#post1064863626
http://www.debatepolitics.com/consp...w-823-852-1124-1449-a-143.html#post1064954107


Anybody who wants to see it can click on the links and see it.
Click to expand...

If you have read the links then surely you could give a short summary of the main points? This thread is not about links. Thank you for confirming the point of the thread.
 
Re: New Conspiracy Theorist tactics...

Fledermaus said:
Recent trend....

CT : I can prove X happened.
Poster: Do you have any sources or citation for that?
CT: Google it.
Poster: It is your claim, back it up.
CT: I already gave sources (untrue). I am not going to source anything else. I don't have to source.
Click to expand...
Change title to "creationist" and you can copy it all into any given religion thread of the nature "god is and diddit".
 
Re: New Conspiracy Theorist tactics...

Fledermaus said:
Recent trend....

CT : I can prove X happened.
Poster: Do you have any sources or citation for that?
CT: Google it.
Poster: It is your claim, back it up.
CT: I already gave sources (untrue). I am not going to source anything else. I don't have to source.
Click to expand...

You nailed it perfectly. Reminds me of the Amertican Dad episode about the " IlluminNUTTY".
Say anything, worry about proof later,... if ever.

Obama's storm troopers still have not kicked my door down yet.

I always shut them down with this statement.....IF...IF the govmint is so oppressive, then why is it I can order a 1,000 round case of military caliber ammunition and have it delivered to my front door. How many oppressive regimes allow that to happen?

That usually shuts them up.
 
Re: New Conspiracy Theorist tactics...

zyzygy said:
If you have read the links then surely you could give a short summary of the main points? This thread is not about links. Thank you for confirming the point of the thread.
Click to expand...

I pointed out where some of the main points were.

September 11 -- The New Pearl Harbor (FULL)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8DOnAn_PX6M
(4:27:49 time mark)


It's such a clear and concise summary that your simply watching it would be more efficient. You seem to use this as an excuse not to have to deal with the info because it's too clear to obfuscate.
 
Re: New Conspiracy Theorist tactics...

Chagos said:
Change title to "creationist" and you can copy it all into any given religion thread of the nature "god is and diddit".
Click to expand...

Trutherism is a religion.
 
Re: New Conspiracy Theorist tactics...

Scott said:
I pointed out where some of the main points were.

September 11 -- The New Pearl Harbor (FULL)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8DOnAn_PX6M
(4:27:49 time mark)


It's such a clear and concise summary that your simply watching it would be more efficient. You seem to use this as an excuse not to have to deal with the info because it's too clear to obfuscate.
Click to expand...

What makes you think that I or others have not seen all those videos already? Why do you think that I accept the official narrative?
 
Re: New Conspiracy Theorist tactics...

What makes you think that I or others have not seen all those videos already? Why do you think that I accept the official narrative?
Click to expand...
You don't state your points. You just tap dance around and avoid issues. Look at the last few pages of this thread.
http://www.debatepolitics.com/consp...7-got-evidence-w-823-852-1124-1449-a-148.html

You seemed to be checkmated. Sincere truth-seekers don't behave that way. You behave like a checkmated sophist. Tell us why you disagree with something such as this when we show it to you.
http://www.debatepolitics.com/consp...w-823-852-1124-1449-a-143.html#post1064954107

Look at the post after the above one. It doesn't get any lamer than that.
 
Re: New Conspiracy Theorist tactics...

zyzygy said:
If you have read the links then surely you could give a short summary of the main points? This thread is not about links. Thank you for confirming the point of the thread.
Click to expand...

Scott is apparently unable to summarize a point in his own words, then use the link as support. That's why I won't bother anymore. Nothing useful to be had in discussing anything with a person with that sort of limitation.
 
Re: New Conspiracy Theorist tactics...

Scott said:
You don't state your points. You just tap dance around and avoid issues. Look at the last few pages of this thread.
http://www.debatepolitics.com/consp...7-got-evidence-w-823-852-1124-1449-a-148.html

You seemed to be checkmated. Sincere truth-seekers don't behave that way. You behave like a checkmated sophist. Tell us why you disagree with something such as this when we show it to you.
http://www.debatepolitics.com/consp...w-823-852-1124-1449-a-143.html#post1064954107

Look at the post after the above one. It doesn't get any lamer than that.
Click to expand...

The same old tactics from you. Nothing you post can be classed as evidence. This thread is not about links. Go back to the who did it thread and tell me how the passengers were disappeared. You seem to be incapable of backing up up your accusations with proof. You really like the word checkmated. Nothing you have posted rivals the official story in its details. Give me proof and I will believe that the government did it.
 
Last edited:
Re: New Conspiracy Theorist tactics...

Mark F said:
Scott is apparently unable to summarize a point in his own words, then use the link as support. That's why I won't bother anymore. Nothing useful to be had in discussing anything with a person with that sort of limitation.
Click to expand...

I'm giving it up too. I hope he enjoys his lifelong hobby.
 
Re: New Conspiracy Theorist tactics...

Go back to the who did it thread and tell me how the passengers were disappeared.
Click to expand...
The viewers can look at our discussion on that on this other thread...
http://www.debatepolitics.com/conspiracy-theories/231261-9-11-did-111.html#post1064961020

...and see who the lame one is. Your follow-up responses don't fit my responses.

If I say that we don't know what the government did with the passengers but that doesn't make the proof of an inside job disappear, and you response is, "What happened to the passengers", you're just playing games. You're not engaging in serious debate. Your responses are just lame attempts at sophistry.

With opponents such as you people we truthers might as well just post stuff for the viewers to see. If you ask a serious question, I'll address it.


edit
-------------------------
Give me proof and I will believe that the government did it.
Click to expand...
I posted some proof in post #4. Your attitude is that there's no proof there but the truth is that you refuse to click on the links and look at it.


If you behave like a checkmated sophist, the viewers are going to think you're a checkmated sophist.

Articles about ombudsmen
(excerpt)
------------------------------
9. Play Dumb

No matter what evidence or logical argument is offered, avoid discussing issues except with denials they have any credibility, make any sense, provide any proof, contain or make a point, have logic, or support a conclusion. Mix well for maximum effect.
 
Last edited:
Re: New Conspiracy Theorist tactics...

In a thread about truthers posting links instead of evidence what does Scott do? Posts links.
 
Re: New Conspiracy Theorist tactics...

Fledermaus said:
Recent trend....

CT : I can prove X happened.
Poster: Do you have any sources or citation for that?
CT: Google it.
Poster: It is your claim, back it up.
CT: I already gave sources (untrue). I am not going to source anything else. I don't have to source.
Click to expand...

Remember my saying:

Conspiracy Theorists have it easy, they make up a conspiracy, and rather than prove it, they ask you to disprove it. And when you do, they accuse you of being part of the conspiracy...and then they start a new one.
 
Re: New Conspiracy Theorist tactics...

 
Re: New Conspiracy Theorist tactics...

Wow, excellent!

Obviously, the conspiracy theorists must be doing something right!

It's brought the government shills out of the woodwork, and now they're complaining loudly!

LOL! I love it!!! :lamo
 
Re: New Conspiracy Theorist tactics...

ballantine said:
Wow, excellent!

Obviously, the conspiracy theorists must be doing something right!

It's brought the government shills out of the woodwork, and now they're complaining loudly!

LOL! I love it!!! :lamo
Click to expand...
When there are several persistent truthers on a forum who are allowed to post freely, they always checkmate the sophists pretty quickly. That's why discussions about 9/11 and the Apollo hoax, etc aren't permitted on about ninety eight percent of forums.


(from post #18)
Conspiracy Theorists have it easy, they make up a conspiracy, and rather than prove it, they ask you to disprove it. And when you do, they accuse you of being part of the conspiracy...and then they start a new one.
Click to expand...
Let's hear your view on their response to this post.
http://www.debatepolitics.com/consp...w-823-852-1124-1449-a-143.html#post1064954107

I think it was pretty lame. What do you think?
 
Re: New Conspiracy Theorist tactics...

Scott said:
I think it was pretty lame. What do you think?
Click to expand...

Well, this is the specific claim made in the original link:

there is absolutely no mode or combination of modes of progressive/natural structural failure driven solely by gravity
Click to expand...

So, if anyone wants to disprove it, it shouldn't be too hard, right? They just need to come up with "one" model driven solely by gravity. Should be easy, if it exists. Yes?

And the only response I could find from our posters here, is "where's the evidence"?

The issue here is exceedingly clear, isn't it? "Find ONE", that's all you have to do. The claim is, "there isn't one", and to disprove the claim you only need to find ONE, and I don't see where any of the government shills have found "even one".

Looks like a "ball's back in your court" thing, 'cause after all, it's the government shills claiming their evidence is impeccable (even though they can't prove it, and in saying that they have to ignore all the evidence that doesn't fit their model). SSDD, right? :)
 
Re: New Conspiracy Theorist tactics...

beefheart said:
Conspiracy Theorists have it easy, they make up a conspiracy, and rather than prove it, they ask you to disprove it.
Click to expand...

OCT defenders have it even easier. They don't have to make up anything. They just parrot the OCT and rather than prove that it's valid, they ask you to disprove it.
 
Re: New Conspiracy Theorist tactics...

Scott said:
When there are several persistent truthers on a forum who are allowed to post freely, they always checkmate the sophists pretty quickly. That's why discussions about 9/11 and the Apollo hoax, etc aren't permitted on about ninety eight percent of forums.


(from post #18)

Let's hear your view on their response to this post.
http://www.debatepolitics.com/consp...w-823-852-1124-1449-a-143.html#post1064954107

I think it was pretty lame. What do you think?
Click to expand...

Off topic.

Start your own thread.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom