Threaded Mode | Linear Mode

Hans Olo · 04-15-2009, 04:18 PM

Will do the same thing. Need a new E-Mail first:)

***April*** · 04-15-2009, 04:28 PM

Glad to see you folks jumping in on this. Yes, I think it's very effective, in multiple ways.
Woken Sheep and the guys used to do this constantly back in the day with local forums and mainstream forums.

It's impossible to calculate realistic productivity with waking folks up this way..... it's prolly the silent lurking readers that it does the most for IMO...... Sorry i'm not getting involved, but good luck to you guys! Your strategies sound great BTW. Slick thinkin folks. Go get em.

~~nietzscheansuperman~~ · (This post was last modified: 04-15-2009 04:31 PM by nietzscheansuperman.)

WTF? Gonna have to try to sign up again.. :angry2:

Account removed at JREF Forum!‏

From: JREF Forum (jrefweb@gmail.com)
Sent: Wednesday, 15 April 2009 8:55:40 AM
To: (me)

Dear Descartes,

*Automated response*

Unfortunately we couldn’t complete your registration for the JREF Forum. We do not retain details of accounts that have not been approved however the most likely reason is that some required information wasn’t entered during the registration process (First name, Last name, Country and State if in the USA). Please either try again to register or drop me an email and I will do my best to sort out any problems you may be experiencing. **Note** my email address is lisa_simpson@randi.org, if you reply to the email address this email was sent from (jrefweb@gmail.com) it will cause a delay in our response to any query you may have, Regards Lisa Simpsonlisa_simpson@randi.orgJREF Forum Administrator

Hans Olo · 04-15-2009, 08:54 PM

Quote:Go get em.

Thanks, that's appreciated.

mastermg · 04-15-2009, 09:32 PM

Im still waiting on my account on the skeptic forum. I wonder whats taking so long?

mmstick · 04-16-2009, 06:00 AM

Quote:WTF? Gonna have to try to sign up again.. :angry2:

Account removed at JREF Forum!‏

From: JREF Forum (jrefweb@gmail.com)
Sent: Wednesday, 15 April 2009 8:55:40 AM
To: (me)

Dear Descartes,

*Automated response*

Unfortunately we couldn’t complete your registration for the JREF Forum. We do not retain details of accounts that have not been approved however the most likely reason is that some required information wasn’t entered during the registration process (First name, Last name, Country and State if in the USA). Please either try again to register or drop me an email and I will do my best to sort out any problems you may be experiencing. **Note** my email address is lisa_simpson@randi.org, if you reply to the email address this email was sent from (jrefweb@gmail.com) it will cause a delay in our response to any query you may have, Regards Lisa Simpsonlisa_simpson@randi.orgJREF Forum Administrator

Yes, that makes a lot of sense there.... lol an automatic account removal? Perhaps they already know of your intentions haha.
I'm waiting on getting my accounts activated..... And I loved the bot check. Last 5 letters in the alphabet? What happened to capthca?
Actually I could easily hack that bot check easily!

I like all the idea's here. They are pretty good.
I've been having problems over here at Xfire involving this unknown group of people.
The more I find out about these people the more hackers I get attacking me.
Seems to be related to something that happened last year for me.
But I have no worries since I can take care of any computer related problems (and hackers) easily.
I was having a bit of trouble getting my web browser to work but I've fixed it all now.
I talk to this person. Goes by the name of Devils1. Will not reply to anything I say.

~~---~~ · 04-16-2009, 12:18 PM

ROFL my application at JREF was declined also!! haha

WIll have to set up another email and try again.

~~---~~ · 04-16-2009, 12:19 PM

Quote:
Quote:WTF? Gonna have to try to sign up again.. :angry2:

Account removed at JREF Forum!‏

From: JREF Forum (jrefweb@gmail.com)
Sent: Wednesday, 15 April 2009 8:55:40 AM
To: (me)

Dear Descartes,

*Automated response*

Unfortunately we couldn’t complete your registration for the JREF Forum. We do not retain details of accounts that have not been approved however the most likely reason is that some required information wasn’t entered during the registration process (First name, Last name, Country and State if in the USA). Please either try again to register or drop me an email and I will do my best to sort out any problems you may be experiencing. **Note** my email address is lisa_simpson@randi.org, if you reply to the email address this email was sent from (jrefweb@gmail.com) it will cause a delay in our response to any query you may have, Regards Lisa Simpsonlisa_simpson@randi.orgJREF Forum Administrator

Yes, that makes a lot of sense there.... lol an automatic account removal? Perhaps they already know of your intentions haha.
I'm waiting on getting my accounts activated..... And I loved the bot check. Last 5 letters in the alphabet? What happened to capthca?
Actually I could easily hack that bot check easily!

I like all the idea's here. They are pretty good.
I've been having problems over here at Xfire involving this unknown group of people.
The more I find out about these people the more hackers I get attacking me.
Seems to be related to something that happened last year for me.
But I have no worries since I can take care of any computer related problems (and hackers) easily.
I was having a bit of trouble getting my web browser to work but I've fixed it all now.
I talk to this person. Goes by the name of Devils1. Will not reply to anything I say.

Good to have them kind of skills, for sure. Don't lead anyone here though; this is base camp;)

mastermg · 04-16-2009, 08:18 PM

The skepticforum still hasn't validated my account yet. What a bunch of weenies.

~~---~~ · 04-16-2009, 10:50 PM

Quote:Glad to see you folks jumping in on this. Yes, I think it's very effective, in multiple ways.
Woken Sheep and the guys used to do this constantly back in the day with local forums and mainstream forums.

It's impossible to calculate realistic productivity with waking folks up this way..... it's prolly the silent lurking readers that it does the most for IMO...... Sorry i'm not getting involved, but good luck to you guys! Your strategies sound great BTW. Slick thinkin folks. Go get em.

Thanks:D

it'd be cool if any of them would be up for it again for fun.:)

~~---~~ · 04-17-2009, 12:50 AM

check out this crazy mofo of a impressionable sound collage of rock

Brave New World

~~---~~ · 04-18-2009, 10:56 AM

Ok, screw JREF for the time being.. skepdics will do imo - and from reading a wee bit there it seems like there might be a few open minded folk hanging around there worthy of appealing of to.

I have my boy with me this weekend so I have no time until the evenings.

What subject does anyone propose we use as a inroad - I'm quite keen on the 911 insider trading angle and 911 general leading on from - but would like to hear any other ideas people have.

We could arrange some point when all interested could go on irc to properly discuss tactics and what not on irc - or if that proves to difficult to coordinate timezone wise - then here..

I think a good start would also be for us to start posting up infos here relevant to the topic chosen that can be looked into and glean for the best parts..but first we need an agreed topic..

:)

Hans Olo · 04-18-2009, 11:28 AM

Quote:911 insider trading angle

Do we know WHO did the insider trading? The pure fact that "someone" knew about 911 and profited is no proof of anything. So we need to know who exactly profited from insider trading shortly before 911 and we would need proof of the actual transaction, before these boneheads accept it for proof. A Washington Post article with the mention of insider trading won't convince them.

I have a suggestion. Let's establish the facts first.
What facts do we have that are solid? What do we have to disregard as hearsay?

Solid evidence, facts:
- There were huge explosions in the towers, this is undisputed...... right?
- The science team did find explosives but it's impossible to prove it caused the explosion. Still, it should be accepted as fact that they were found, unless someone questions the credibility of the source.
- There were firemen telling people WTC7 was going to come down.
- The towers and WTC7 collapsed in a manner and speed that suggests no resistance from the lower floors.
- BBC News reporting the collapse of WTC7 minutes before it happened. That is history.
- Norman Mineta's testimony. I'm still thinking, what the hell was that. Someone grab a video-pod and a camera and confront him.

Things that COULD be solid facts, but have to be looked at closely:
- Phones that supposedly didn't work on that altitude and in the plane. We need to find out which model was installed in the planes at that time, and then look at the specs and talk to an Egineer. Can't just believe someone else's conclusions.

Hearsay / Rumours / Maybes / Conclusions:
- almost everything else. Examples:
- Bin Laden is on an FBI list or not has absolutely no significance.
- if Bush or Rumsfeld misspoke and said "bombs" is no proof of anything. Still, that cracks me up though..
- assumptions about what flight path was supposedly taken, and the famous 360 degree turn. Can't verify it happened that way.
- Anything based on the grainy 5 frames of "video" taken from the Pentagon. They didn't release the other videos in order for us to have nothing to refer to, and that's where we are. We have nothing to refer to.
- Speculations how scattered a debris field is after a crash or after a plane was shot down. Nobody I know is an expert on this, neither are you, neither am I.

Of course that's all based on my own assumptions, you might sort it out differently. Remember, I typed this off the top of my head.

~~---~~ · (This post was last modified: 04-18-2009 12:33 PM by ---.)

Brilliant Hans this is exactly the path we have to take - I am in total agreement. I intend to start getting into the leg work this coming week - we can collate and disseminate everything here in advance.

It would also be useful imo to dredge up Rod's post about rhetoric and attune our arguments and reasoning with such in mind.

Also by creating a veritable avalanche of circumstantial facts and things which can be said not to prove anything in and of themselves - it still is creating a background that only the most cynical can dismiss as superfluous - and when they do it's our tiget trap they are falling into not vise versa.

As said I will get started on the legwork this coming week and try and sift down through to the very nitty gritty as best possible. But no-one has to wait for me, to get started on it themselves obviously hehe

Great comments:)

Hans Olo · (This post was last modified: 04-18-2009 04:27 PM by Hans Olo.)

About rhetoric: Let's collect examples of brilliant rhetoric about 911 and analyze them.

In fact I have a particular piece in mind. Remember when the popular mechanics guy was on the Charles Goyette show on June 23. 2008. There was a caller who brought up the issue of what evidence does the government have that it was indeed these 19 hijackers. Simple, the PM guy said, they discovered DNA evidence of everybody, including the hijackers. Then they ask the PM guy the simple question:

Where did they get the original DNA to match it with?

The rest of the show is just classic! The PM guy can't talk his way out of that one, although he tries everything. It was like watching Goyette holding him in a wrestling grip, and he flaps around and waves with his arms and makes gurgling noises until he passes out. He does not let him change the topic, forces him to admit to all kinds of things, making him promise he'll look into it (probably never did). But it straightened that arrogant SOB out for good. No radio interview for you, Davin Coburn

That's always a good 'trap' you want to steer the conversation at. If you get them to mention the DNA evidence, ask them "how accurate is that"? A harmless question... then they'll explain that it's 100% fail-safe, that you're stupid for not knowing how DNA evidence works, and all kinds of stuff. You ignore all that and ask them:

Where did they get the original DNA to match it with?

They will immediately try to change the topic. Never leave that point until it's either acknowledged or explained. Insist on an answer, just like Goyette did in the show.

Charles Goyette show on June 23. 2008

go to about 5 minutes in.

Edit: Some guy on youtube wrote that "it was offically anounced that original DNA was recovered from hijacker hideouts". So they do have an answer now. Just not a very good one. Why not? Well where did they get the original DNA to match with the DNA they found in a hotel room? A hotel room is "DNA-paradise" you'll find DNA of every body and soul who used it. Just step into the bathroom. Or look under the bed. How did they know which DNA was which back then?