Creative Speculation

Ace Acme

(1,464 posts)

12. Non sequitur, false dichotomy, straw man nonsense was your attempt at an argument nt

Reply to William Seger (Reply #11)

Tue Oct 29, 2013, 02:44 PM

Oct 2013

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

115 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

9/11 Free Fall 7/18/13: Dr. deHaven-Smith and "conspiracy theory" [View all] damnedifIknow Jul 2013 OP

The sad thing about this interview... William Seger Jul 2013 #1

If you've never seen the "conspiracy theorist" label applied to anyone Ace Acme Oct 2013 #2

Bullshit. Conspriacry theorists don't "QUESTION" the official account William Seger Oct 2013 #3

You've changed the spec. Ace Acme Oct 2013 #4

Your compulsion to respond to every post William Seger Oct 2013 #5

You claimed that the "conspiracy theorist" label was not applied to legitimate skeptics Ace Acme Oct 2013 #6

LOL, are you walking back your "competent demolitionist" theory? William Seger Oct 2013 #7

Non sequitur, false dichotomy, straw man nonsense nt Ace Acme Oct 2013 #8

Priceless! William Seger Oct 2013 #9

And now we can add argument-by-emoticon to the list Ace Acme Oct 2013 #10

Except that wasn't intended as an argument William Seger Oct 2013 #11

Non sequitur, false dichotomy, straw man nonsense was your attempt at an argument nt Ace Acme Oct 2013 #12

Actually, that post wasn't an "argument" either William Seger Oct 2013 #13

I'm glad we agree on that. Ace Acme Oct 2013 #14

LOL William Seger Oct 2013 #15

When LOL is all you've got it's time to pack it in nt Ace Acme Oct 2013 #16

This silly thread was due for packing in several posts ago William Seger Oct 2013 #17

The silliness was entirely yours. Ace Acme Oct 2013 #18

Nope, it turned silly when you denied being a conspiracy theorist (n/t) William Seger Nov 2013 #19

I'm not a conspiracy theorist. Ace Acme Nov 2013 #20

AUTOMATED MESSAGE: Results of your Jury Service joeglow3 Nov 2013 #21

Would you prefer the term "truther"? William Seger Nov 2013 #22

So now you're down to argument-by-emoticon and argument-by-label. Ace Acme Nov 2013 #23

Holy crap. zappaman Nov 2013 #24

When and where was it proven? Ace Acme Nov 2013 #25

You haven't actually read the report, have you? (n/t) William Seger Nov 2013 #28

Well, in this case, the argument WAS about the label William Seger Nov 2013 #26

"conspiracy theorist" has become an idiomatic expression Ace Acme Nov 2013 #29

"believed by lazy fools" William Seger Nov 2013 #30

The history of those alleged hijackers' training includes registered addresses Ace Acme Nov 2013 #31

KSM was not being tortured in April 2002 William Seger Nov 2013 #32

Fosri is a liar. His reports can not be verified and he admitted he lied. Ace Acme Nov 2013 #33

So, the best you can do is fart in the general direction of some of the confessions William Seger Nov 2013 #34

You're Quote Mining After I Already Pointed that Out Ace Acme Nov 2013 #35

Intellectual fraud much? William Seger Nov 2013 #38

You're changing the subject from column access to collapse initiation. Ace Acme Nov 2013 #40

Say what?! Changing the subject? YOU claimed easy column access William Seger Nov 2013 #42

Core column access from elevator shafts would have facilitated planting Ace Acme Nov 2013 #44

"I didn't say that..." William Seger Nov 2013 #47

I didn't say that. Ace Acme Nov 2013 #49

Sorry, but I don't take you as seriously as you do William Seger Nov 2013 #50

The distortion is entirely yours. Ace Acme Nov 2013 #51

Again, you want to make your reading comprehension issues my problem William Seger Nov 2013 #53

You're trying to make your mischaracterization of the record my problem. Ace Acme Nov 2013 #55

What "mischaracterization" is that? William Seger Nov 2013 #59

It was possible to access most of the main structural columns from the elevator shafts Ace Acme Nov 2013 #61

No, it was not William Seger Nov 2013 #63

Most of the main structural core columns were accessible from the elevator shafts Ace Acme Nov 2013 #64

You have a peculiar way of dealing with being wrong William Seger Nov 2013 #67

I wasn't wrong Ace Acme Nov 2013 #68

Hmm... could be we just disagree about the meaning of the terms William Seger Nov 2013 #72

This is quite interesting. AZCat Nov 2013 #74

Of course we disagree. You redefine terms to fit your rhetorical needs Ace Acme Nov 2013 #75

Holy cow William Seger Nov 2013 #78

As usual, you know not whereof you speak. Ace Acme Nov 2013 #80

As usual, you attach undue significance to your own interpretation William Seger Nov 2013 #81

NIST lied. The collapses were not explained. The 10 mysteries were not addressed. Ace Acme Nov 2013 #82

NIST did not lie. Collapse propagation had ALREADY been explained William Seger Nov 2013 #83

NIST does not credit Dr. Bazant for explaining the collapse Ace Acme Nov 2013 #84

Newton's Third Law? William Seger Nov 2013 #85

Newton's 3rd Law Ace Acme Nov 2013 #86

You're overlooking something simple William Seger Nov 2013 #87

Yes, when the debris becomes overwhelming, the tower falls. Duh. Ace Acme Nov 2013 #88

Say what? It seems you don't understand what Bazant is saying William Seger Nov 2013 #89

There is no insulating mat in the Verinage demonstrations Ace Acme Nov 2013 #90

This is like "debating" a brick wall William Seger Nov 2013 #91

IOW, your airy handwaving can not defeat fact and physical principles Ace Acme Nov 2013 #92

You can run but you can't hide William Seger Nov 2013 #93

The verinage videos show Newton's Third Law in Action. Ace Acme Nov 2013 #94

Oh, you never said the collapse has to be halted? William Seger Nov 2013 #95

Nobel Prize Awarded to Anonymous Internet Poster Ace Acme Nov 2013 #96

"How could we have been so wrong?" William Seger Nov 2013 #97

The point is irrelevant. Bazant's model does not resemble reality. NIST does not name him. Ace Acme Nov 2013 #98

It wouldn't be irrelevant if you actually wanted your "mysteries" solved William Seger Nov 2013 #99

Bazant's theory bears no resemblance to reality. Ace Acme Nov 2013 #100

You don't UNDERSTAND anything Bazant says William Seger Nov 2013 #101

I understand what he says just fine. What he says bears no resemblance to reality. nt Ace Acme Nov 2013 #102

Good comeback. zappaman Nov 2013 #103

When did I show my inability to understand? Ace Acme Nov 2013 #105

You demonstrate it with every post. zappaman Nov 2013 #107

You make empty claims. Ace Acme Nov 2013 #108

Uh huh. zappaman Nov 2013 #109

Your pretenses bear no resemblance to reality William Seger Nov 2013 #104

The game here is not worth the candle of intelligent discussion. Ace Acme Nov 2013 #106

"If I put any effort into any posts..." zappaman Nov 2013 #110

But you've posted 53 times in this thread alone William Seger Nov 2013 #111

You have done far more typing, and far less thinking, than I. Ace Acme Nov 2013 #112

Whatever thinking you have done about Bazant's analysis ... William Seger Nov 2013 #113

I understand Dr. Bazant's analysis just fine. It ain't rocket science. Ace Acme Nov 2013 #114

So your best is to change the subject and try to ignore the fact that your expert Ace Acme Nov 2013 #36

Your dismissal of the confessions was so obviously lame... William Seger Nov 2013 #37

Uncorroborated hearsay accounts from admitted liars are not good evidence. Ace Acme Nov 2013 #39

Confessions to third parties are not considered to be hearsay William Seger Nov 2013 #41

"Confessions" to interested parties that are known to lie to achieve their objectives Ace Acme Nov 2013 #43

I though maybe you'd enjoy researching it yourself William Seger Nov 2013 #45

It is hardly an argument from incredulity to ask you to document your claims Ace Acme Nov 2013 #46

Done, and your predictable response: argument from incredulity William Seger Nov 2013 #52

I didn't "focus" on "paper". It was the first point of many. Ace Acme Nov 2013 #56

Osama's Alleged Confession is a Moot Point Ace Acme Nov 2013 #48

Once upon a time in a cave far, far away.... William Seger Nov 2013 #54

Do you have a point? Ace Acme Nov 2013 #57

Yep, point is: fairy tales don't make OBL's confessions moot William Seger Nov 2013 #58

Sibel Edmonds is not a fairy tale Ace Acme Nov 2013 #60

Bull William Seger Nov 2013 #62

Your claims sure are Ace Acme Nov 2013 #65

There's that reading comprehension thing again. William Seger Nov 2013 #66

There's your selective quoting again. Ace Acme Nov 2013 #69

Your dishonest arguments are becoming tiresome William Seger Nov 2013 #70

Your hysterical blindness is showing. Ace Acme Nov 2013 #71

LMAO William Seger Nov 2013 #73

Your claim that I gave up is fraudulent nt Ace Acme Nov 2013 #76

Well, you're not even trying to justify your claim William Seger Nov 2013 #77

You blow so much smoke I don't even remember what my claim was. Ace Acme Nov 2013 #79

(Deleted misplaced reply) William Seger Nov 2013 #27

ah nevermind.. wildbilln864 Feb 2014 #115