On 12/12/06, geni <geniice(a)gmail.com> wrote:
On 12/12/06, George Herbert <george.herbert(a)gmail.com> wrote:
On 12/12/06, geni <geniice(a)gmail.com>
wrote:
> [[Scholars for 9/11 Truth]] is a significant indication of the
problem.
What is wrong with that page?
No idea I haven't read it isn't relvivant to my point. My point out
there is that there are CTs produceing a large amount of citable
material. Most the the active oponents (such as the author of "screw
loose change") who are the ones who acutaly write down the point by
point debunkings tend not to produce the same amount of citable
material.
For any reasonable individual, it only takes one good thorough debunking to
show what kooks these nuts are.
The fact that 5 tinfoil hats, even 5 tinfoil hats with cheap university
degrees and too little psychological evaluation, spend all day writing about
this still doesn't mean we should give them any credence.
"Eat dung. 10 million flies can't be wrong."
Parker