Quote:
Originally Posted by moncton golden flames
you can believe the engineers and universities, but i have not read any of those documents so i can't comment on it. just don't think i should 'believe' what you think i should.
|
No one is telling you to "believe" anything, you said it yourself, you haven't read the material so you aren't in a position to take a position, which is the most reasonable position to take. However...
Quote:
Originally Posted by moncton golden flames
as far as religion goes, i brought it up because they sell 100% certainty, similarly to what you seem to be pushing. i don't buy it.
|
I don't think anyone in this thread is pushing 100% certainty.
However you must agree that some ideas are far more likely than others. One fallacy that conspiracy theorists fall into is this idea that an unanswered question or a uncertainty automatically means that all possible answers are equally likely.
A simple illustration of this is finding a hoofprint in your yard. What made it? Without any more info, it could be a horse, a zebra, or a unicorn. It's clear all those alternatives are not equally likely, and while you cannot say beyond doubt what made that hoofprint, in practice you can be pretty confident about it (unless you hear on the news later that the zoo had a jailbreak).
Same thing with this stuff, while I have no doubt that not all the information is available and that things are being hidden (likely to cover stupidity), this does not mean that nano-thermite being used to destroy the buildings is even a reasonable option, given the lack of evidence.
Quote:
Originally Posted by moncton golden flames
but not backing down and attacking somebody's belief is assinine.
|
Beliefs should be fair game to attack, especailly if they are baseless but put forward as being well supported.