Skeptic Project

No Diane. The Tampa flight happened after US airspace reopened.

http://www.snopes.com/rumors/flights.asp<br /> http://www.911myths.com/html/family_flights.html<br /> http://www.911myths.com/index.php/Bin_Laden_family_flight</p>

Also see page 4:
http://www.9-11commission.gov/staff_statements/911_TerrTrav_App.pdf</p>

911 Commission notes/emails:
http://www.scribd.com/doc/18662673/T5-B68-Tampa-Airport-QFRs-Fdr-Saudi-Flights-Emails-and-Notes-635</p>

I realise that others have also said these things, but they are not arguing for a conspiracy whereas Nick and other truthers are. Their intent for questioning it is totally different. For example I may also be against the Iraq war, but if my intent for questioning the Iraq war is to prove a conspiracy with 911 then my argument is NOT RATIONAL.

Truthers will also keep making the same debunked claims for years and years after they are shown to be false. And, the fact is its not just this one thing he said. He made all kinds of typical truther talking points that are straight out of Loose Change like it or not, but that doesn't mean Loose Change is making a rational argument.

I don't know why you even referred me to these articles anyway, since even if they didn't make these errors we know he still believes in demolitions at this point. To prove he is a rational truther you'd have to show him arguing against demolitions, denouncing all his previous claims and allegiances (eg. to 911Truth.org) and not promoting any false claims in any articles AFTER THAT TIME. Can you do that? Nope, and in fact after the time you said he was rational (being late 2008) in 2009 he suggests KSM is an actor, but not just an actor, but just one of many.

How "rational" someone seems to be is very much in the eye of the beholder.

And you think truthers like Nick are rational even though he made all those false claims I pointed out in articles you cited as "rational" articles and even though since 2004 you claim he were merely LIHOP (with benefits) he still promoted all the same nuttiness like demolitions at least up until 2007 and still didn't correct his ridiculous website in 2008 when he last updated it and when you claimed he had changed his mind (and STILL hasn't corrected it TO THIS DAY.)

I'm afraid I don't find such dishonesty worthy of my respect Diane. As I said even I can find a better example of a truther than you, like I said Oil Empire ACTUALLY DOES argue against demolitions not just claim they do like Nick but then keeps promoting all of it on their websites.

Oh and your defence of his website being that he may feel its some kind of archive for what the truth movement was is pathetic. If he REALLY believed what you say he believes and he really was honest, then doing that would be fine so long as he had a huge disclaimer on the front page denouncing all of it and stating that it is merely for historical purposes only. That is what an honest person would do, that is, if they really did not believe that stuff anymore. And what is really hilarious is that you believe that the Eric Hufschmid link should be taken down! If its an archive, there is no reason to take it down. Its JUST as valid being there as everything else he has on that website, yet you think specifically he should update his website and remove that one link but not all the other stuff. As I said Diane, you just can't defend this man without tying yourself up in intellectual knots.

As I said before which you apparently keep ignoring:

...the bottom line is that just because you can find a more rational than most truther article, doesn't mean it is rational.

...Remember, being NOT QUITE as crazy, stupid, incompetent or as ignorant as SOME truther's doesn't mean you aren't still crazy, stupid, incompetent or ignorant."

I feel that you are speaking from black-and-white, us-and-them tribal instinct, and that you are absolutely determined to see "them" as not just wrong but crazy.

Your "feelings" are wrong.

I don't believe all truthers are crazy, they may be ignorant and quick to believe without enough critical thinking and skepticism sure. However the ones that have been told why they are wrong over and over again but keep on believing anyway are the ones that are crazy. Nick has been doing this for so long he has no excuse, he is therefore either too stupid to get it or has some mental illness, or he is just being dishonest with himself and others. There is no RATIONAL reason for him to believe the things he does. As I said, a truther is either crazy, stupid, dishonest, incompetent or ignorant.