Hello thanks for allowing me to be here

DwnWthVwls · 05-19-2015, 12:29 AM

I didn't say that it did. I was just showing it's not really that far of a leap that the US government would do such things considering it's history.

I said in my first post that I also wasn't convinced, but I'm also not gonna back the government like you do because they are shitbags.

The government should always be questioned to keep it in check, no matter how good it is.

roscoe_the_first · 05-19-2015, 12:30 AM

Look it's simple DeadChannel

SHOW ME THE EVIDENCE FOR THE OFFICIAL STORY?

If you cannot do this then a New Inquiry is required.

N' est-ce Pas?

roscoe_the_first · 05-19-2015, 12:33 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DwnWthVwls

I didn't say that it did. I was just showing it's not really that far of a leap that the US government would do such things considering it's history.

I said in my first post that I also wasn't convinced, but I'm also not gonna back the government like you do because they are shitbags.

The government should always be questioned to keep it in check, no matter how good it is.

let them feel your ire hold their feet to the fire

**Frownland** · 05-19-2015, 12:36 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DwnWthVwls

I didn't say that it did. I was just showing it's not really that far of a leap that the US government would do such things considering it's history.

I said in my first post that I also wasn't convinced, but I'm also not gonna back the government like you do because they are shitbags.

Charles Manson supports gay marriage. Do you support gay marriage? If you said yes then you just gave a massive pat on the back for good ole Manson.

Just because the guy who's being blamed sucks doesn't mean you have to immediately agree with his enemies, but that's kind of how it goes with conspiracy theorists. Yes, you will have to defend a man accused of some bull**** he didn't do, but that doesn't mean you accept everything that the man has done.

Like say a man gets murdered and the police have their eye on a suspect. You were licking the suspect's scrotum the evening of the incident, so he's innocent as far as that goes. However, it's pretty safe to say that the suspect also shipped cocaine to several third world countries to supply the drug trade and in turn create business for himself. So would you say that he murdered the man or would you say you licked his balls at the time of the event?

Ad hominem ain't no fun man. You always end up tongue thrusting someon'e nutsack.

DwnWthVwls · 05-19-2015, 12:36 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by roscoe_the_first

let them feel your ire hold their feet to the fire

I'm not angry.

**Frownland** · 05-19-2015, 12:38 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by roscoe_the_first

Look it's simple DeadChannel

SHOW ME THE EVIDENCE FOR THE OFFICIAL STORY?

If you cannot do this then a New Inquiry is required.

N' est-ce Pas?

You don't seem to understand how it works:

Philosophic burden of proof - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This ****'s on you breh. Let it out and **** all over our mouths, then let us return the favour.

DeadChannel · 05-19-2015, 12:41 AM

Quote:

Show me evidence for the official story?

What official story? You still haven't provided a falsifiable thesis that I can argue against.
Also, the burden of proof is on the maker of extraordinary claims. "Show me the proof I'm wrong" is what's known as an "appeal to ignorance", and it's a pretty common logical fallacy.

It falls in the same camps as "prove that god's not true" and "prove that there's no giant purple plush orangutan suction cupped to the back of mars".

Quote:

No please show me your justification for blowing the arms and legs off kids?

Again, without a falsifiable thesis, I have no idea what the hell you're talking about. So how's that thesis coming?

I have no justification, but that's okay because that's not actually a thing I've personally ever done to my knowledge.

Quote:

Surely you have some evidence. Don't you?

Well, maybe if I knew what you were talking about. Like, if you provided me with a falsifiable thesis.

Quote:

As for my theory

DUNNO

NEED A NEW INQUIRY.

THAT'S HOW PROOF HAS ALWAYS BEEN ASCERTAINED IN THE PAST.

So, basically, you've dodged every point I've made with a complete lack of grace, failing to address anything. Maybe if you spent half as much time tooting your own horn and bragging about past debates you've had actually refuting things and providing evidence, you'd be in a better position. Oh, and also if you had a falsifiable thesis (so that you don't move the goalposts, and also so that I know what the bollocks you're talking about).

EDIT: Oh, look, you replied a second time while I was typing this. I think I covered that though. Oh, btw, how's that FALSIFIABLE THESIS coming?

DwnWthVwls · 05-19-2015, 12:42 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Frownland

Ad hominem ain't no fun man. You always end up tongue thrusting someon'e nutsack.

I'll back anyone who I agree with, even if I don't like them. I think roscoe got your brain all hung up. I already said 2x now I also was not convinced, what I'm waiting for you to say is that it is POSSIBLE that it was an inside job, even if you think it was not. Blind faith in government is dangerous, their morality is no different from yours and mine.

**Frownland** · 05-19-2015, 12:45 AM

Nah I'll do it on a case by case basis instead of waiting for some other guy to come in and say he has doubt before I go on with some accusations.

DwnWthVwls · 05-19-2015, 12:51 AM

Idk, what you're even talking about anymore. I just provided you with 3 instances of the US committing or planning to commit heinous crimes against itself/allies to push an agenda, and you didn't disagree, but you also believe that the government would never do such a thing.

Taking things on a case by case basis is logical and I agree with your approach, but to sit here and claim that it's no longer a possibility for the government to act in a way it has previously acted is just stubborn.

05-19-2015, 12:30 AM	#72 (permalink)
roscoe_the_first Music Addict Join Date: Aug 2014 Posts: 76	Look it's simple DeadChannel SHOW ME THE EVIDENCE FOR THE OFFICIAL STORY? If you cannot do this then a New Inquiry is required. N' est-ce Pas? __________________ Roscoe

05-19-2015, 12:45 AM	#79 (permalink)
Frownland SOPHIE FOREVER Join Date: Aug 2011 Location: East of the Southern North American West Posts: 35,541	Nah I'll do it on a case by case basis instead of waiting for some other guy to come in and say he has doubt before I go on with some accusations. __________________ Studies show that when a given norm is changed in the face of the unchanging, the remaining contradictions will parallel the truth. d e a f b o x