Disappointing Debunking on this forum.

  • Thread starter KokomoJ0
  • Start date
In summary, the forum closes any discussion of 9/11 conspiracy theories due to the hyperbolic claims of those who believe in them. The moderators/administrators have determined that there is a "clear right and wrong" on the subject, and that the "right" answer is the official story.
  • #1
KokomoJ0
4
0
I came to this forum with the idea that there would be intelligent discussion on such subjects as 911 and other areas of concern. I am very disappointed to discover that a few people have determined that they are the final word and have closed all further discussion when fraud battles against nist fema asce government etc rage on in the courts regarding these very issues.

Its nice to see these issues have been settled to satisfaction by whomever the person(s) is/are that shut down any further discussion of the subject.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
It's a tough compromise. We want to be able to debunk things but also don't want to allow promotion of crackpottery. And there are certain subjects (like 9/11) that bring the crackpots out of the woodwork, so we don't discuss them. Typically the subjects we have banned (like the 9/11 conspiracy theories) have clear right and wrong answers anyway and there isn't much to be gained by discussing them.
 
  • #3
Daily Kos banned 9/11 conspiracy discussions as well.
 
  • #4
russ_watters said:
It's a tough compromise. We want to be able to debunk things but also don't want to allow promotion of crackpottery. And there are certain subjects (like 9/11) that bring the crackpots out of the woodwork, so we don't discuss them. Typically the subjects we have banned (like the 9/11 conspiracy theories) have clear right and wrong answers anyway and there isn't much to be gained by discussing them.

Crackpots frustrate me too.

Considering there are continuing developments on the subject and also taking into consideration the monumental implications should a conspiracy be proven I am sure you are right on target that there is nothing to be gained by talking about it.

I noticed the last moderator post that who ever shut the thread down agreed with the official report yet architectural engineers and scientists are suing the government for false information dissemination.

In any case I am happy that the moderators/administrators on this forum have determined there is a "clear right and wrong" on the subject and that the "right" answer is the official story stands.

As I stated earlier I find your approach disappointing and certainly counterproductive to resolving any rendition of truth.
 
  • #5
I think discussion on individual reports or technical questions about steel structures and fire proofing are allowed.
The trouble is that any difference between one engineering opinion and any official report immediately becomes "it's all a cover up".

It's a bit like the argument that goes; Chaos says that science can't answer everything, therefore science is wrong, therefore anything that science says is wrong must be right, therefore crystal healing is true!
 
Last edited:
  • #6
The "truth" as you call it has been resolved and there is no credible new information. There are still crackpots trying to make a buck off of the gullible, there always will be.

There are many crackpot sites on the internet where you can discuss 9/11 conspiracy theories, this is not one of them.
 
Last edited:
  • #7
As stated in the S&D posting guidelines, my PM box is always open to new information about closed subjects.

In over four years we have only closed ten subjects. Some people probably think that makes me a crackpot, and others think it makes me a dictator. As long as I am hated equally by both sides then I must be doing something right. :biggrin:
 
  • #8
Ivan Seeking said:
As stated in the S&D posting guidelines, my PM box is always open to new information about closed subjects.

In over four years we have only closed ten subjects. Some people probably think that makes me a crackpot, and others think it makes me a dictator. As long as I am hated equally by both sides then I must be doing something right. :biggrin:

Frankly this would be a waste of my time. I just finished reading all that I need to read to fully understand the governance of this forum.

I have found very little intelligent discourse here on the subject but rather hyperbole, obfuscation, double think and a host of other out right errors from people some who are self proclaimed structural engineers.

Frankly I have reconsidered and this is not a site where I wish to engage anyone on the matter.

I will go back to my other crack pot site where actual "physics" is discussed and you can continue your censorship here.
 
  • #9
feel free to delete my account as I have visted the account settings and did not see a close account procedure.
 
  • #10
I find it rather strange that one would create an account solely to complain and then say that they will not be posting here. Well, it is apparent that this site is not for you. I would, however, like to add that the many members and regular posters to this forum are quite happy with the way that it is run, and with the fact that it is one of the only physics forums on the internet that actually tries to educate about physics and not crackpot physics or conspiracy theories.
 

1. What is "Disappointing Debunking" on this forum?

"Disappointing Debunking" refers to the act of attempting to discredit or disprove a claim or belief, but doing so in a way that is unconvincing, poorly researched, or lacking in evidence. It is commonly seen in online discussions and forums where individuals may try to refute an argument without providing solid counterarguments.

2. How can I avoid "Disappointing Debunking" on this forum?

To avoid "Disappointing Debunking" on this forum, it is important to thoroughly research and understand the topic before attempting to debunk it. Make sure to provide reliable sources and evidence to support your argument, and avoid relying on personal opinions or speculation. Additionally, be open to considering alternative perspectives and engage in respectful and logical discussions.

3. Why is "Disappointing Debunking" considered problematic?

"Disappointing Debunking" is considered problematic because it can lead to misinformation and confusion. If a claim or belief is not properly and effectively debunked, it can continue to spread and be perceived as true. It also hinders productive and respectful discussions, as it may come off as dismissive or disrespectful to the other party's beliefs or arguments.

4. Can "Disappointing Debunking" ever be effective?

In rare cases, "Disappointing Debunking" may be effective in convincing someone who is already skeptical or on the fence about a certain topic or claim. However, in most cases, it is not considered an effective way to debunk an argument or belief as it lacks solid evidence and logical reasoning.

5. How can we encourage better debunking practices on this forum?

To encourage better debunking practices on this forum, it is important to educate members on the importance of thorough research, critical thinking, and respectful discussions. Moderators can also play a role in promoting quality debunking by enforcing rules against personal attacks and requiring sources and evidence to support arguments. Additionally, members can actively engage in fact-checking and providing constructive feedback to improve each other's debunking skills.

Similar threads

  • Feedback and Announcements
Replies
21
Views
2K
  • Feedback and Announcements
Replies
1
Views
409
  • Sticky
  • Quantum Interpretations and Foundations
Replies
1
Views
4K
Replies
4
Views
2K
Replies
17
Views
4K
  • Feedback and Announcements
Replies
14
Views
4K
  • Feedback and Announcements
Replies
26
Views
3K
  • Other Physics Topics
2
Replies
36
Views
3K
  • STEM Academic Advising
Replies
2
Views
846
  • Feedback and Announcements
Replies
26
Views
5K
Back
Top