Logic, The Pentagon, and question for Mr. Fetzer

Discussion in '9/11' started by RtWngaFraud, Apr 1, 2012.

You are viewing posts in the Conspiracy Theory forum. PF does not allow misinformation. However, please note that posts could occasionally contain content in violation of our policies prior to our staff intervening.

  1. RtWngaFraud

    RtWngaFraud Banned

    Joined:
    Feb 16, 2011
    Messages:
    20,420
    Likes Received:
    106
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Sir...in your book "The scamming of America" (9/11 Conspiracy), you accurately point out that a 757 hitting the Pentagon is a ridiculous concept from start to finish, and on page 54, you raise many interesting points concerning the absurdity of the idea. You write that theories including the plane (supposed plane) "bouncing" off the ground, cartwheeling, etc., (that were floated at the time) would be ludicrous. You accurately indicate that there was no massive debris like luggage, seats, engines, wings, a tail section, or even bodies present at the scene.
    You reference "modus tollens" (that if p=q, but not q, then not p, and if q must be true when when p is true, but q is NOT true, then p is NOT true either), which confuses me a bit. You state that it's it's an elementary rule of deductive reasoning, and the employment of it being fundamental to scientific investigations. Could you expand on this a bit please? I've read and re-read it several times and I'm confused by it.
    Thank you ahead of time Sir, and keep up the good fight and ignore the interference attempts of certain folks. The intelligent reader appreciates the effort I'm sure (I know I do).
     
  2. RtWngaFraud

    RtWngaFraud Banned

    Joined:
    Feb 16, 2011
    Messages:
    20,420
    Likes Received:
    106
    Trophy Points:
    0


    Mr. Fetzer...would you care to respond please??
     
  3. RtWngaFraud

    RtWngaFraud Banned

    Joined:
    Feb 16, 2011
    Messages:
    20,420
    Likes Received:
    106
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Like I said..WASN'T Mr. Fetzer. Whomever is pretending to be Fetzer doesn't know how to respond specifically to what is in his own book.....therefore, he doesn't....because well,...IT ISN'T FETZER.
     
  4. Hannibal

    Hannibal New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2009
    Messages:
    10,624
    Likes Received:
    13
    Trophy Points:
    0
    So you never bothered to contact Fetzer directly.
     
  5. Patriot911

    Patriot911 New Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jul 2, 2008
    Messages:
    9,312
    Likes Received:
    40
    Trophy Points:
    0
    And once again we see the standard truther tactics at work. Don't like the truth? Ignore all the evidence, bury your head in the sand and sing "LA LA LA LA LA" as loud as you can until the truth goes away.

    In this instance a truther "hero" is exposed as a fraud and a liar. What do other truthers do? Face the truth? Nope. They claim he isn't who he claims he is even though he has been confirmed as the real deal. To fix this, the truthers are given the contact information so they can prove it to themselves or, if they are right, have the "real" Mr. Fetzer come on and defend his "good" name. Apparently that is too hard when it is so much easier to just deny the truth and run away.
     
  6. DDave

    DDave Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 12, 2010
    Messages:
    2,002
    Likes Received:
    34
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Here's that contact info for you again.

    contact Jim Fetzer by email at jfetzer@d.umn.edu or by phone at 608-835-2707

    You're starting to remind me of that other guy who would never contact the direct source.
     
  7. RtWngaFraud

    RtWngaFraud Banned

    Joined:
    Feb 16, 2011
    Messages:
    20,420
    Likes Received:
    106
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Not Fetzer. He could have answered the question very easily...he chose not to. Specifics are often a problem with imposters.
     
  8. DDave

    DDave Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 12, 2010
    Messages:
    2,002
    Likes Received:
    34
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Did you confirm that? Or do you "just know"?

    And contacting a direct source for verification is often a problem for truthers.
     
  9. RtWngaFraud

    RtWngaFraud Banned

    Joined:
    Feb 16, 2011
    Messages:
    20,420
    Likes Received:
    106
    Trophy Points:
    0


    I say, an imposter. He should answer here. He doesn't. Your point is moot.
     
  10. DDave

    DDave Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 12, 2010
    Messages:
    2,002
    Likes Received:
    34
    Trophy Points:
    48
    So he's an imposter because you say so??

    My point is not moot unless you sent him an email and he replied saying that the "Jim Fetzer" posting on PF is an imposter.

    Have you done so?
     
  11. BullsLawDan

    BullsLawDan New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 1, 2010
    Messages:
    5,723
    Likes Received:
    98
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Maybe he saw that you were the poster of the thread and decided not to read it. Gee, I can't imagine why anyone would want to do that...

    How do you even know he saw the thread?
     
  12. NAB

    NAB Active Member

    Joined:
    Oct 6, 2009
    Messages:
    1,821
    Likes Received:
    14
    Trophy Points:
    38
    Have you considered the possibility that he just didn't just care enough to respond to you? Maybe Jim is just unaware of how important you really are.

    You should contact him immediately and rectify this error.
     
  13. RtWngaFraud

    RtWngaFraud Banned

    Joined:
    Feb 16, 2011
    Messages:
    20,420
    Likes Received:
    106
    Trophy Points:
    0


    Well, that's one point of view. Another is that the Mr. Fetzer here is just a creation by a shill entity (that lacks the ability to state what the ACTUAL Mr. Fetzer would be able to answer very easily from a book HE wrote) to further undermine the truth. All depends on what the agenda is I suppose.
     
  14. Hannibal

    Hannibal New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2009
    Messages:
    10,624
    Likes Received:
    13
    Trophy Points:
    0
    So you STILL haven't contacted Jim Fetzer directly to find out.

    Nice work, 'truthseeker'.
     
  15. Fangbeer

    Fangbeer Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Apr 13, 2011
    Messages:
    10,848
    Likes Received:
    3,823
    Trophy Points:
    113
    The agenda appears to be hypothesis preservation.

    Someone who watches the following with an open mind might have an awakening.

    http://www.ted.com/talks/tim_harford.html

    Just in case you missed exactly which hypothesis I'm referring to, it would be this one:

     
  16. Patriot911

    Patriot911 New Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jul 2, 2008
    Messages:
    9,312
    Likes Received:
    40
    Trophy Points:
    0
    So I've noticed an interesting point with truthers. When confronted by easily verifiable evidence that they can actually do themselves, truthers run away. Why?

    Is it because they already know the truth and don't want to have this excuse for lying taken away from them?

    Is it because they are afraid of the truth and don't want the possibility of the truth being confirmed?

    Is it because they are too lazy and are hoping someone spoon feeds them the answer they want?

    Is it because they just don't really care because it is just about the agenda not the truth?

    Food for thought as we watch truthers run from the truth.
     
  17. RtWngaFraud

    RtWngaFraud Banned

    Joined:
    Feb 16, 2011
    Messages:
    20,420
    Likes Received:
    106
    Trophy Points:
    0


    I HAD an open mind following 9/11...until I explored the details and discovered they were mostly false. An awakening? I'm not the one sleeping.
     
  18. Patriot911

    Patriot911 New Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jul 2, 2008
    Messages:
    9,312
    Likes Received:
    40
    Trophy Points:
    0
    So now you admit you have a closed mind? Wow. I guess you wouldn't want to debate you either given your statement in your other post. :lol:

    Just a reminder of what you said about debating closed minds.

     
  19. RtWngaFraud

    RtWngaFraud Banned

    Joined:
    Feb 16, 2011
    Messages:
    20,420
    Likes Received:
    106
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Closed to a degree...yes. I've had over a decade to study the "official" story and find it to be dishonest. However, I'll consider proof that I'm incorrect at any point. I've seen none to date though. I see "enthusiastic" advocates, but little in the way of actual proof. The inconsistencies are all over the place though.

    There ya go...now attack.
     
  20. Fangbeer

    Fangbeer Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Apr 13, 2011
    Messages:
    10,848
    Likes Received:
    3,823
    Trophy Points:
    113
    You watched an 18 minute Ted talk in 10 minutes?

    Wow.

    Have you contacted Fetzer to see if your hypothesis is correct yet?
     
  21. Patriot911

    Patriot911 New Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jul 2, 2008
    Messages:
    9,312
    Likes Received:
    40
    Trophy Points:
    0
    No need to attack. You do a fine job of proving the irrelevancies of your own posts.

    As for proof to the contrary, why is it you won't address the glaring inconsistancies in your own posts like claiming it was only two people behind all of 9/11 yet the one part of the theory you've claimed is what you believe would involve hundreds if not thousands of people. That doesn't even cover the rest of 9/11, just Shanksville.
     
  22. Patriot911

    Patriot911 New Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jul 2, 2008
    Messages:
    9,312
    Likes Received:
    40
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Time, like many other things like truth, honesty, and the facts, are irrelevant to truthers, thus truthers can watch any video in any amount of time and still have the same closed mind to the truth. Mind altering concept, isn't it!
     
  23. BullsLawDan

    BullsLawDan New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 1, 2010
    Messages:
    5,723
    Likes Received:
    98
    Trophy Points:
    0
    So, have you contacted Fetzer yet?
     
  24. DDave

    DDave Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 12, 2010
    Messages:
    2,002
    Likes Received:
    34
    Trophy Points:
    48
    So you don't consider any of the information from the following page as proof that you're incorrect?

    https://sites.google.com/site/wtc7lies/flight93page1
     
  25. DDave

    DDave Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 12, 2010
    Messages:
    2,002
    Likes Received:
    34
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Good Lord.

    I'll email him myself.
     

Share This Page