Sandy Hook Conspiracy.
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
18-01-2013, 11:35 AM
RE: Sandy Hook Conspiracy.
(18-01-2013 11:29 AM)Nappa Wrote:  
(18-01-2013 11:17 AM)Chas Wrote:  No, it is up to you to provide actual evidence of an actual conspiracy. Suspicion, innuendo, speculation don't qualify.

Memos, e-mails, testimony, something that shows the existence of a conspiracy.
Alright fine you prick, I'll do that but first you must provide actual evidence that a god doesn't exist. No suspicion, no inconsistencies, and no speculation.

you really think I'd be able to get my hands on a memo or an e-mail from them? And There are problems with the testimony which was in the video in the OP. You clearly didn't watch it or you chose to DELIBERATELY ignore those parts. It's very unlikely that anything would have been sent by e-mail and even then any sort of document could be faked to provide more weight for the conspiracy side, just like testimonies can be faked. You dumb ass. I've already talked about the only physical evidence this event has. Which would be the bodies.
You clearly misunderstand debate, evidence, weight of evidence, and burden of proof.

I am not making any claim here about the existence of a conspiracy or about the existence of a god.
I don't have to present any evidence.

The video presents absolutely no evidence of a conspiracy, just innuendo. People's testimony is among the least reliable kind of evidence there is - people are fallible, especially recalling events under stress.

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 3 users Like Chas's post
18-01-2013, 12:17 PM
RE: Sandy Hook Conspiracy.
(18-01-2013 11:35 AM)Chas Wrote:  You clearly misunderstand debate, evidence, weight of evidence, and burden of proof.

I am not making any claim here about the existence of a conspiracy or about the existence of a god.
I don't have to present any evidence.

The video presents absolutely no evidence of a conspiracy, just innuendo. People's testimony is among the least reliable kind of evidence there is - people are fallible, especially recalling events under stress.
I'm gonna try and make this as little embarrassing as I can on you.

You are trying to claim that 28ish people died in a school shooting, just like a christian would try to prove the existence of a god. It's your burden to prove that, not mine. I am simply refuting the 'evidence' I've seen on the media through logical deductions. Choosing not to believe it happened the way I was told it did.

Most important. Previously when I asked you what kind of evidence you wanted, you listed testimony as one of them, now you're saying they're unreliable? (as I've said all along) and then you give the one that make mistakes an excuse as to say "they were under stress" you know what other time a witness changes their testimony which is often the far most common one? It's when they're making shit up.

So now you're saying you will accept eye-witness testimonies, but only when it suits your particular interests. Anything that is inconvenient to your religion you just shove off to the side, well I've got news for you. It doesn't work that way in a logical analysis of a situation. You can not cherry pick.

As I've said before the only physical evidence for this would be the dead bodies. Until there are dead bodies, ALL of our evidence IS eye-witness testimonies.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
18-01-2013, 12:21 PM
RE: Sandy Hook Conspiracy.
(18-01-2013 12:17 PM)Nappa Wrote:  
(18-01-2013 11:35 AM)Chas Wrote:  You clearly misunderstand debate, evidence, weight of evidence, and burden of proof.

I am not making any claim here about the existence of a conspiracy or about the existence of a god.
I don't have to present any evidence.

The video presents absolutely no evidence of a conspiracy, just innuendo. People's testimony is among the least reliable kind of evidence there is - people are fallible, especially recalling events under stress.
I'm gonna try and make this as little embarrassing as I can on you.

You are trying to claim that 28ish people died in a school shooting, just like a christian would try to prove the existence of a god. It's your burden to prove that, not mine. I am simply refuting the 'evidence' I've seen on the media through logical deductions. Choosing not to believe it happened the way I was told it did.

Most important. Previously when I asked you what kind of evidence you wanted, you listed testimony as one of them, now you're saying they're unreliable? (as I've said all along) and then you give the one that make mistakes an excuse as to say "they were under stress" you know what other time a witness changes their testimony which is often the far most common one? It's when they're making shit up.

So now you're saying you will accept eye-witness testimonies, but only when it suits your particular interests. Anything that is inconvenient to your religion you just shove off to the side, well I've got news for you. It doesn't work that way in a logical analysis of a situation. You can not cherry pick.

As I've said before the only physical evidence for this would be the dead bodies. Until there are dead bodies, ALL of our evidence IS eye-witness testimonies.


No, I did not say 'eye-witness testimony'. I want testimony from a conspirator to provide evidence of a conspiracy.

I am not debating you - I am asking you to provide evidence of your claims that this event did not occur or that there was a conspiracy to stage it.

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
18-01-2013, 12:36 PM
RE: Sandy Hook Conspiracy.
(18-01-2013 12:21 PM)Chas Wrote:  No, I did not say 'eye-witness testimony'. I want testimony from a conspirator to provide evidence of a conspiracy.

I am not debating you - I am asking you to provide evidence of your claims that this event did not occur or that there was a conspiracy to stage it.
A testimony is a testimony through the eye-witness or a conspirator. And both can be equally fallible, in fact a small known portion of people actually lie when they confess to committing a crime.

My evidence was all in the original video. It was pretty straightforward and to the point with a good analysis of the situation from a unemotional rationale. It's not my fault if you're being religious.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
18-01-2013, 12:51 PM
RE: Sandy Hook Conspiracy.
(18-01-2013 12:36 PM)Nappa Wrote:  
(18-01-2013 12:21 PM)Chas Wrote:  No, I did not say 'eye-witness testimony'. I want testimony from a conspirator to provide evidence of a conspiracy.

I am not debating you - I am asking you to provide evidence of your claims that this event did not occur or that there was a conspiracy to stage it.
A testimony is a testimony through the eye-witness or a conspirator. And both can be equally fallible, in fact a small known portion of people actually lie when they confess to committing a crime.

My evidence was all in the original video. It was pretty straightforward and to the point with a good analysis of the situation from a unemotional rationale. It's not my fault if you're being religious.


Religious? Asking for evidence is religious?

The evidence for a conspiracy is lacking.

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
18-01-2013, 12:59 PM
RE: Sandy Hook Conspiracy.
(18-01-2013 12:51 PM)Chas Wrote:  Religious? Asking for evidence is religious?

The evidence for a conspiracy is lacking.
No asking for evidence is not religious. Deliberately denying evidence and a well formed argument just because you don't want to believe it is. Which is what you've done this entire thread, only to be stifled to just a few words to try and save face in your defeat. Let's be honest here, you really don't want to believe that your government is a corrupt piece of shisnanny that makes your toilet turds look like cotton candy. Neither do I. And that is where we separate, I'm willing to accept something even if I don't like it. I measure things by their weight in evidence and logical analysis, not my emotional attachment to them.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
18-01-2013, 01:09 PM
RE: Sandy Hook Conspiracy.
(18-01-2013 12:59 PM)Nappa Wrote:  
(18-01-2013 12:51 PM)Chas Wrote:  Religious? Asking for evidence is religious?

The evidence for a conspiracy is lacking.
No asking for evidence is not religious. Deliberately denying evidence and a well formed argument just because you don't want to believe it is. Which is what you've done this entire thread, only to be stifled to just a few words to try and save face in your defeat. Let's be honest here, you really don't want to believe that your government is a corrupt piece of shisnanny that makes your toilet turds look like cotton candy. Neither do I. And that is where we separate, I'm willing to accept something even if I don't like it. I measure things by their weight in evidence and logical analysis, not my emotional attachment to them.


You seem willing to accept something on speculation and bizarre interpretation. Fine, believe it.

I see the purported evidence as tenuous, speculative, connecting dots that aren't there.

We're done here.

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 3 users Like Chas's post
18-01-2013, 01:31 PM
RE: Sandy Hook Conspiracy.
(18-01-2013 12:17 PM)Nappa Wrote:  As I've said before the only physical evidence for this would be the dead bodies. Until there are dead bodies, ALL of our evidence IS eye-witness testimonies.

Why would you accept physical evidence of dead bodies?

I think in the end, I just feel like I'm a secular person who has a skeptical eye toward any extraordinary claim, carefully examining any extraordinary evidence before jumping to conclusions. ~ Eric ~ My friend ... who figured it out.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
18-01-2013, 01:49 PM
RE: Sandy Hook Conspiracy.
(18-01-2013 12:59 PM)Nappa Wrote:  I measure things by their weight in evidence and logical analysis, not my emotional attachment to them.

No, Nappa, it is clear that you do not. You are clearly emotionally attached to the idea of widespread government corruption, so much so, that you're unable to look at the evidence in a clear logical manner. Just as Chas said, everything presented is tenuous and speculative at worst, and has rational explanations at best.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
18-01-2013, 01:58 PM
RE: Sandy Hook Conspiracy.
(18-01-2013 01:31 PM)kim Wrote:  Why would you accept physical evidence of dead bodies?

What nappy is saying if he were an eye-witness to any crime ... Like say a car suddenly hitting a pedestrian -- the pedestrian then yells profanity at the driver of the car, takes out a gun and shoots at the car, before running away down a an alley. He wouldn't do anything because it might be the government trying to fool him. Because eye-witness accounts simply cannot be trusted --- even his own. In this convoluted tale, let's further suggest that in his shock over the events he does related to the police what he *thinks* he saw --- and some crackpot 3000 miles away calls it bullshit because...You can't trust eye-witness testimony.

Now I suppose if the alleged car struck a pedestrian and killed them instantly, then he couldn't argue what he saw...the argument becomes circular crap....because someone else will call bullshit because they didn't see it and will demand to see rhe dead body......and George bush senior and 'merica stuffs.

Yes, I did note the autocorrect of this individual's name and decided to leave it.


Wind's in the east, a mist coming in
Like something is brewing and about to begin
Can't put my finger on what lies in store
but I feel what's to happen has happened before...


Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Momsurroundedbyboys's post
Post Reply
Forum Jump: