Lost 9/11 Plane Part Found

[© tweed]

again, falsifying a no-planes theory is but a small subsection of the predominant alternative 9/11 narratives.

[© tweed]

again, falsifying a no-planes theory is but a small subsection of the predominant alternative 9/11 narratives.

You know what? I've had it.  you and  your "predominant narratives".  all of them. Every single ing one. 9/11 is not a "narrative" concocted by some government official or whoever for whatever bullsh**t reason some crackpot conspiracy theorist thinks they had. There is no "official narrative" to be disputed. There is the truth, and then there is everything else.

Now go back to ing YouTube and ing 4chan.

Bravo! Just bravo! :-D

Thanks, Mr. Badger!

again, to both of you, I have never advocated for or against the official narrative, nor the alternative narratives.  there is no bravery here, no need to congratulate each other, you have achieved nothing by holding up the official narrative, as if this act makes you some sort of superior person.  anyone can do what you are doing.

[© tweed]

again, falsifying a no-planes theory is but a small subsection of the predominant alternative 9/11 narratives.

You know what? I've had it.  you and  your "predominant narratives".  all of them. Every single ing one. 9/11 is not a "narrative" concocted by some government official or whoever for whatever bullsh**t reason some crackpot conspiracy theorist thinks they had. There is no "official narrative" to be disputed. There is the truth, and then there is everything else.

Now go back to ing YouTube and ing 4chan.

Bravo! Just bravo! :-D

Thanks, Mr. Badger!

again, to both of you, I have never advocated for or against the official narrative, nor the alternative narratives.  there is no bravery here, no need to congratulate each other, you have achieved nothing by holding up the official narrative, as if this act makes you some sort of superior person.  anyone can do what you are doing.

Go away.

I'm coming up on a decade here in just a few weeks, so I wouldn't count on it, you'll have to learn some of the beloved liberal tolerance.

[© tweed]

you're using some categories that you haven't thought out well enough.  what is your theory of truth?  what makes something true, how do we attain it?  we are not speaking here about something stupidly simple as to be purely academic... we can accept as true that I am typing on a keyboard, that there is a tissue box on my desk, for purposes of this discussion.

[© tweed]

you're using some categories that you haven't thought out well enough.  what is your theory of truth?  what makes something true, how do we attain it?  we are not speaking here about something stupidly simple as to be purely academic... we can accept as true that I am typing on a keyboard, that there is a tissue box on my desk, for purposes of this discussion.

And ignore. This isn't Tweed 'n' Alfred's Philosophy Roundtable here.

 

so you throw around concepts, in such a platitudinous fashion as to make it meaningless (truth=Good!  lies=bad!) and then refuse to go say word one about the concepts.  this may not be the moment, but, eventually, your false certainty will fail you.

[© tweed]

again, falsifying a no-planes theory is but a small subsection of the predominant alternative 9/11 narratives.

You know what? I've had it.  you and  your "predominant narratives".  all of them. Every single ing one. 9/11 is not a "narrative" concocted by some government official or whoever for whatever bullsh**t reason some crackpot conspiracy theorist thinks they had. There is no "official narrative" to be disputed. There is the truth, and then there is everything else.

Now go back to ing YouTube and ing 4chan.

Bravo! Just bravo! :-D

Thanks, Mr. Badger!

again, to both of you, I have never advocated for or against the official narrative, nor the alternative narratives.  there is no bravery here, no need to congratulate each other, you have achieved nothing by holding up the official narrative, as if this act makes you some sort of superior person.  anyone can do what you are doing.

Truth is singular. It's versions are mistruths.

the second sentence means what?

[© tweed]

We don't need to have a moronic pseudo-intellectual dorm room bull session about epistemology to know well-documented facts about something that happened a few years ago.

need, perhaps not, but it provides an opportunity, and the idea of a message board is not to necessarily hold every conversation to a peer-review standard.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

do you attempt to apply this to the relatively 'tame' advance-knowledge debate?