So, about 9/11....

A forum for the discussion of heuristic questions relating to Druidry using verifiable methods. Fo-fúair!
Life is short, the art long, opportunity fleeting, experiment treacherous, judgment difficult. — Hippocrates

Sturgeon's Law: Ninety percent of everything is crap.

This is a public forum, viewable by guests as well as members, and is cataloged by most search engines.
Forum rules
If you find a topic of interest and want to continue the discussion then start a new topic under The Hearthfire with a similar name and add a link back to the topic you want to continue.
User avatar
Aemilius
Posts: 122
Joined: 29 Nov 2010, 22:39
Gender: Male
Contact:

So, about 9/11....

Post by Aemilius » 03 Dec 2014, 05:50

....just curious really. I don't see any threads about it. Do you go with the truthers, the official narrative, or are you undecided? Where do you all fall on the issue? Does anyone feel they really know one way or the other?
WTC7.... http://aemilius.sosblog.com/ .... A Conclusive Empirically Verifiable Graphical Target System Analysis

User avatar
DJ Droood
OBOD Druid
Posts: 5558
Joined: 02 Feb 2003, 18:52
Gender: Male
Location: North Eastern North America
Contact:

Re: So, about 9/11....

Post by DJ Droood » 03 Dec 2014, 15:13

Kind of a long time ago... I don't think the board sprang to life until a couple of years later. I personally accept the view that Saudi funded Wahabi terrorists got lucky. I don' t find any of the conspiracy theories I've heard to be credible...just the standard "anti new world order/illuminatii" stuff.
Image
2010 LI
2011 LI
2013 BS
Image
12/10-Ancestors
"If organized religion is the opium of the masses, then disorganized religion is the marijuana of the lunatic fringe."
Kerry Thornley

User avatar
Aemilius
Posts: 122
Joined: 29 Nov 2010, 22:39
Gender: Male
Contact:

Re: So, about 9/11....

Post by Aemilius » 03 Dec 2014, 17:00

Hey DJ (it's been a while)....
DJ Droood wrote:Kind of a long time ago... I don't think the board sprang to life until a couple of years later. I personally accept the view that Saudi funded Wahabi terrorists got lucky. I don' t find any of the conspiracy theories I've heard to be credible...just the standard "anti new world order/illuminatii" stuff.
Right.... and based on that, you would essentially fall into the category of accepting the official narrative. You're not impressed by the credibility of any of the conspiracy theories put out there about the towers at sites like this one for example....

http://www.ae911truth.org/

How deeply did you look into it (if you care to discuss it)?
Last edited by Aemilius on 04 Dec 2014, 06:15, edited 2 times in total.
WTC7.... http://aemilius.sosblog.com/ .... A Conclusive Empirically Verifiable Graphical Target System Analysis

User avatar
DJ Droood
OBOD Druid
Posts: 5558
Joined: 02 Feb 2003, 18:52
Gender: Male
Location: North Eastern North America
Contact:

Re: So, about 9/11....

Post by DJ Droood » 03 Dec 2014, 17:29

Aemilius wrote:Hey DJ (it's been a while)....
DJ Droood wrote:Kind of a long time ago... I don't think the board sprang to life until a couple of years later. I personally accept the view that Saudi funded Wahabi terrorists got lucky. I don' t find any of the conspiracy theories I've heard to be credible...just the standard "anti new world order/illuminatii" stuff.
OK, so you essentially would fall into the category of accepting the official narrative. You weren't impressed by the credibility of any of the information out there about the towers at sites like this one for example.... http://www.ae911truth.org/
Yes, I accept the official version, although I'm sure there are still secrets and unknowns. I look at motivation, complexity of the plot, etc to decide if the official narrative seems reasonable, and it does to me. I am not an engineer, so wading through reports about the melting point of titanium or whatever won't do me much good. It is sort of like the climate debate....I don't really get the science so I choose to believe the consensus of the majority of scientists. ..If a minority of religio-political activists have other ideas, they don't interest me much. And to be honest re: 9/11, I just don't really care that much anymore...it happened, it was awful, but I've moved on....If the lizard people are out to get us, I don't feel there is much I can do....plus I always get the sneaky suspicion that old fashioned antisemitism is the underlying motive for many of the "power structure" type conspiracies. ...life is too short...I'll take things at face value until I see a consensus view from people who know what they are talking about.
Image
2010 LI
2011 LI
2013 BS
Image
12/10-Ancestors
"If organized religion is the opium of the masses, then disorganized religion is the marijuana of the lunatic fringe."
Kerry Thornley

User avatar
DJ Droood
OBOD Druid
Posts: 5558
Joined: 02 Feb 2003, 18:52
Gender: Male
Location: North Eastern North America
Contact:

Re: So, about 9/11....

Post by DJ Droood » 03 Dec 2014, 17:39

I'm actually much more dubious about the moon landing in the 60's if we are doing random unsubstantiated conspiracies :grin:
Image
2010 LI
2011 LI
2013 BS
Image
12/10-Ancestors
"If organized religion is the opium of the masses, then disorganized religion is the marijuana of the lunatic fringe."
Kerry Thornley

User avatar
Aemilius
Posts: 122
Joined: 29 Nov 2010, 22:39
Gender: Male
Contact:

Re: So, about 9/11....

Post by Aemilius » 03 Dec 2014, 17:52

DJ Droood wrote:I'm actually much more dubious about the moon landing in the 60's if we are doing random unsubstantiated conspiracies :grin:
Actually, I'd like to confine it to 9/11 (that is the stated topic). Agreed about the Moon Landing though.
WTC7.... http://aemilius.sosblog.com/ .... A Conclusive Empirically Verifiable Graphical Target System Analysis

User avatar
Whitemane
OBOD Ovate
Posts: 1605
Joined: 19 Jan 2012, 21:21
Gender: Male
Location: Columbus, OH, USA
Contact:

Re: So, about 9/11....

Post by Whitemane » 03 Dec 2014, 18:31

I don't see why their should be a thread about 9/11 anywhere on
DHP.

Frankly, I have no time for conspiracy theories. Too often they
fail to acknowledge or pass two key tests that the skeptical
druid is well aware of:

* Occam's razor,
* Non-falsifiability.

That is, they tend to multiply unknowns unnecessarily and when
the theory is shown to be erroneous, if not false, they either
reject the test or add another layer of complexity to cover up
their errors.

Life is messy, everybody makes mistakes. Sometimes they are
small and have no real effect, sometimes the effects snowball and
that original small mistake leads to tragedy. This leads me
nicely to another dictum from one of the finest researchers into
intelligence agencies (Olivier Schmitt):

"Never ascribe to conspiracy that which can be explained by
incompetence."

So no, I don't accept the existence of any great conspiracy or
cover-up about 9/11, only that good people trying to do their
best didn't do enough in a fractured and dysfunctional system.
May the long time sun shine upon you,
All love surround you,
And the pure light within you,
Guide your way on.

User avatar
Aemilius
Posts: 122
Joined: 29 Nov 2010, 22:39
Gender: Male
Contact:

Re: So, about 9/11....

Post by Aemilius » 03 Dec 2014, 18:33

DJ Droood wrote: Yes, I accept the official version, although I'm sure there are still secrets and unknowns. I look at motivation, complexity of the plot, etc to decide if the official narrative seems reasonable, and it does to me. I am not an engineer, so wading through reports about the melting point of titanium or whatever won't do me much good. It is sort of like the climate debate....I don't really get the science so I choose to believe the consensus of the majority of scientists. ..If a minority of religio-political activists have other ideas, they don't interest me much. And to be honest re: 9/11, I just don't really care that much anymore...it happened, it was awful, but I've moved on....If the lizard people are out to get us, I don't feel there is much I can do....plus I always get the sneaky suspicion that old fashioned antisemitism is the underlying motive for many of the "power structure" type conspiracies. ...life is too short...I'll take things at face value until I see a consensus view from people who know what they are talking about.
I guess that sums it up then (here in The Skeptical Druid).... there aren't any objective hard facts included there to discuss or that would tend to support your view, only subjective speculation, so I have no response really. Your conclusion would seem to be based on the same footing as the conspiacy theorists (having no credibility), just in the opposite sense.
WTC7.... http://aemilius.sosblog.com/ .... A Conclusive Empirically Verifiable Graphical Target System Analysis

User avatar
DJ Droood
OBOD Druid
Posts: 5558
Joined: 02 Feb 2003, 18:52
Gender: Male
Location: North Eastern North America
Contact:

Re: So, about 9/11....

Post by DJ Droood » 03 Dec 2014, 18:37

Time for my lunch, then.
Image
2010 LI
2011 LI
2013 BS
Image
12/10-Ancestors
"If organized religion is the opium of the masses, then disorganized religion is the marijuana of the lunatic fringe."
Kerry Thornley

User avatar
Aemilius
Posts: 122
Joined: 29 Nov 2010, 22:39
Gender: Male
Contact:

Re: So, about 9/11....

Post by Aemilius » 03 Dec 2014, 18:46

Whitemane wrote:I don't see why their should be a thread about 9/11 anywhere on
DHP.

Frankly, I have no time for conspiracy theories. Too often they
fail to acknowledge or pass two key tests that the skeptical
druid is well aware of:

* Occam's razor,
* Non-falsifiability.

That is, they tend to multiply unknowns unnecessarily and when
the theory is shown to be erroneous, if not false, they either
reject the test or add another layer of complexity to cover up
their errors.

Life is messy, everybody makes mistakes. Sometimes they are
small and have no real effect, sometimes the effects snowball and
that original small mistake leads to tragedy. This leads me
nicely to another dictum from one of the finest researchers into
intelligence agencies (Olivier Schmitt):

"Never ascribe to conspiracy that which can be explained by
incompetence."

So no, I don't accept the existence of any great conspiracy or
cover-up about 9/11, only that good people trying to do their
best didn't do enough in a fractured and dysfunctional system.
Why shouldn't there be a thread about 9/11? If you don't care then why respond? if it makes you uncofortable you can just ignore the topic (that's what most people do).

As for the rest of what you wrote there, there aren't any objective hard facts (here in The Skeptical Druid) that would tend to support your conclusion (if that's what it is), so it would seem to also be based on the same kind of footing as the conspiracy theorists (having no credibility as DJ put it), again just in an opposite sense.

Interesting.
Last edited by Aemilius on 04 Dec 2014, 07:51, edited 2 times in total.
WTC7.... http://aemilius.sosblog.com/ .... A Conclusive Empirically Verifiable Graphical Target System Analysis

User avatar
Whitemane
OBOD Ovate
Posts: 1605
Joined: 19 Jan 2012, 21:21
Gender: Male
Location: Columbus, OH, USA
Contact:

Re: So, about 9/11....

Post by Whitemane » 03 Dec 2014, 18:56

You asked for opinions, not facts.

You got my opinion.

If you don't like it, that's your problem, not mine.
May the long time sun shine upon you,
All love surround you,
And the pure light within you,
Guide your way on.

xidia
OBOD Ovate
Posts: 285
Joined: 23 Sep 2013, 08:26
Gender: Female
Contact:

Re: So, about 9/11....

Post by xidia » 03 Dec 2014, 18:58

I refer you to the description of the forum "A forum for the discussion of heuristic questions relating to Druidry using verifiable methods. Fo-fúair!"

What's the relationship to druidry?

User avatar
Aemilius
Posts: 122
Joined: 29 Nov 2010, 22:39
Gender: Male
Contact:

Re: So, about 9/11....

Post by Aemilius » 03 Dec 2014, 19:04

Whitemane wrote:You asked for opinions, not facts.

You got my opinion.

If you don't like it, that's your problem, not mine.
If it was opinions I was after I wouldn't have posted in The Skeptical Druid. I never said I didn't like your opinion (better use quotes), only that there are no objective hard facts there in your post that would tend to support it or lend it any credibilty.... it's your opinion and your welcome to it.
Last edited by Aemilius on 03 Dec 2014, 19:15, edited 1 time in total.
WTC7.... http://aemilius.sosblog.com/ .... A Conclusive Empirically Verifiable Graphical Target System Analysis

User avatar
Aemilius
Posts: 122
Joined: 29 Nov 2010, 22:39
Gender: Male
Contact:

Re: So, about 9/11....

Post by Aemilius » 03 Dec 2014, 19:10

xidia wrote:I refer you to the description of the forum "A forum for the discussion of heuristic questions relating to Druidry using verifiable methods. Fo-fúair!"

What's the relationship to druidry?
Is the seeking out of truth no longer considered Druidic?
WTC7.... http://aemilius.sosblog.com/ .... A Conclusive Empirically Verifiable Graphical Target System Analysis

User avatar
Whitemane
OBOD Ovate
Posts: 1605
Joined: 19 Jan 2012, 21:21
Gender: Male
Location: Columbus, OH, USA
Contact:

Re: So, about 9/11....

Post by Whitemane » 03 Dec 2014, 19:15

Aemilius wrote:
Whitemane wrote:You asked for opinions, not facts.

You got my opinion.

If you don't like it, that's your problem, not mine.
If it was opinions I was after I wouldn't have posted in The Skeptical Druid. I never said I didn't like your opinion (better use quotes), only that there are no objective hard facts there in your post that would tend to support it or lend it any credibilty.... it's your opinion and your welcome to it.
Seriously?

Where do you ask for facts?
May the long time sun shine upon you,
All love surround you,
And the pure light within you,
Guide your way on.

User avatar
Aemilius
Posts: 122
Joined: 29 Nov 2010, 22:39
Gender: Male
Contact:

Re: So, about 9/11....

Post by Aemilius » 03 Dec 2014, 19:29

Whitemane wrote:
Aemilius wrote:
Whitemane wrote:You asked for opinions, not facts.

You got my opinion.

If you don't like it, that's your problem, not mine.
If it was opinions I was after I wouldn't have posted in The Skeptical Druid. I never said I didn't like your opinion (better use quotes), only that there are no objective hard facts there in your post that would tend to support it or lend it any credibilty.... it's your opinion and your welcome to it.
Seriously?

Where do you ask for facts?
From the Rules (my interpretation open to correction).... "Attempt to outline your argumentation clearly; if you are not entirely sure you are correct, it may be a good idea to do a quick google to verify and to find a link to support your view...." I thought it was taken for granted here that posts need to be supported by some kind of factual empirically verifiable information.... ???
Last edited by Aemilius on 03 Dec 2014, 19:39, edited 1 time in total.
WTC7.... http://aemilius.sosblog.com/ .... A Conclusive Empirically Verifiable Graphical Target System Analysis

User avatar
treegod
OBOD Druid
Posts: 2141
Joined: 26 Apr 2007, 16:28
Gender: Male
Location: Catalonia, Spain
Contact:

Re: So, about 9/11....

Post by treegod » 03 Dec 2014, 19:36

There are unscrupulous people that scheme, manipulate, deceive and hide things behind closed doors.
I'm sure in this case it's true, but specifics can't be known.
It could be a highly developed conspiracy, or just some people using the situation to their advantage. A sort of retrospective conspiracy.

BTW has anyone heard of the Shock Doctrine?

xidia
OBOD Ovate
Posts: 285
Joined: 23 Sep 2013, 08:26
Gender: Female
Contact:

Re: So, about 9/11....

Post by xidia » 03 Dec 2014, 19:47

Aemilius wrote:
xidia wrote:I refer you to the description of the forum "A forum for the discussion of heuristic questions relating to Druidry using verifiable methods. Fo-fúair!"

What's the relationship to druidry?
Is the seeking out of truth no longer considered Druidic?
I didn't say that. I asked what 9/11 has to do with druidry.

User avatar
Whitemane
OBOD Ovate
Posts: 1605
Joined: 19 Jan 2012, 21:21
Gender: Male
Location: Columbus, OH, USA
Contact:

Re: So, about 9/11....

Post by Whitemane » 03 Dec 2014, 19:53

Aemilius wrote:
Whitemane wrote:

Where do you ask for facts?
From the Rules (my interpretation open to correction).... "Attempt to outline your argumentation clearly; if you are not entirely sure you are correct, it may be a good idea to do a quick google to verify and to find a link to support your view...." I thought it was taken for granted here that posts need to be supported by some kind of factual empirically verifiable information.... ???
That doesn't answer my question. Where do you ask for facts?
May the long time sun shine upon you,
All love surround you,
And the pure light within you,
Guide your way on.

User avatar
Aemilius
Posts: 122
Joined: 29 Nov 2010, 22:39
Gender: Male
Contact:

Re: So, about 9/11....

Post by Aemilius » 03 Dec 2014, 19:58

Whitemane wrote:That doesn't answer my question. Where do you ask for facts?
Sorry about the lack of clarity, but ike I said, I didn't think I needed to. If you need me to spell it out for you though I will right here, I'm asking for facts.... Got any that support your opinion?
WTC7.... http://aemilius.sosblog.com/ .... A Conclusive Empirically Verifiable Graphical Target System Analysis

Locked

Return to “The Skeptical Druid”