Part 3: Are 9-11 Truthers Welcome Here?
My two earlier columns on the 9-11 truth issue generated voluminous commentary from members-- much of it useful and insightful. But we also saw a negative phenomenom-- an outpouring of distasteful and venomous commentary that came largely (albeit, not entirely) from truther members who took the opportunity to attack other members and BreakTheMatrix itself. The 9-11 issue discussions were the third time we've seen unpleasantness here; it happened earlier over the questions of profanity on the website and Zionist/Israel matters. Three times now we've seen a few members go far beyond the bounds of reasoned discourse, old fashioned good manners, and acceptance of BreakTheMatrix guidelines. A brief review is perhaps in order; so maybe we can learn something for the future.
The swearing/profanity issue came up early in the life of the website. One memorable member in particular decided he had a constitutional free speech right to use profanity here; he loudly expressed that view (complete with a blast of swear words); he was banned; and BreakTheMatrix adopted a "no profanity" rule which we believe has served the site well ever since. For the benefit of newer members we repeat the policy-- BreakTheMatrix is a "no profanity" zone, and it's going to stay that way.
Zionist/Israel matters have been a point of contentious debate every step of the way, and most of the time members have adhered to reasoned discourse. Not always-- from time to time we've banned a few people (from both sides of the debate)-- but mostly. Not surprisingly, there's been periodic unpleasantness in Zionist/Israel postings, but overall we haven't felt any pressing need to use censorship or stifle discussion. On balance, (and with a few notable exceptions), members participating in the Z/I discussions have approached the issues in a spirit of good faith despite strong beliefs and widely differing viewpoints. From our standpoint at BreakTheMatrix, we find some amusement from the fact that we've been attacked at various times as being anti--Semitic, and at other times as being a Zionist sellout mouthpiece. Our "no compromise" members won't agree, but maybe we're doing something right where Z/I issues are concerned.
The 9-11 truth columns, however, brought forth something we hadn't seen before. It came primarily-- not entirely, but primarily-- from the truther side, and what we saw might best be described as a combination of deep anger, and an attitude from a few posters of insufferable intellectual arrogance: "I know it all, and you're a moron." Absolute certainty? In a factual circumstance where the evidence can fairly be described as conflicting and open to multiple interpretations? In our view, "certainty" is out of place at this stage of the evidence development, but a few truther posters took the view that reasoned disagreement with their "inside job" position was not merely unacceptable, it wasn't even possible. Intolerance was not a one way street-- we saw some overly strong positions expressed on the anti--truther side as well-- but what was striking about the truther view (as expressed by a few posters) was that criticism or even a whiff of uncertainty was perceived as a personal attack of high order and an affront to core beliefs. Want some examples? Here are a few samplings from 9-11 truther postings (in fairness, from a small group of people):
Piss off
Complete fool
Case closed
Load of bullshit
Exposing your ignorance
You are an Idiot
Liar
Anyone with half a brain knows 9-11 was a false flag
Intellectually dishonest
Moron (a favored catchall term of one poster in particular)
Shove your Masonic Jewish bullshit up your ass
I could go on-- but is there any need? These are precisely the forms of argument we reject at BreakTheMatrix, and for two reasons. First, (in our view), such commentary is flat out wrong on the merits and present quality of the 9-11 evidence. It is NOT a "load of bullshit" to question the 9-11 truther position. The 9-11 case is NOT closed. Many people with full and functioning brains do NOT accept the "knowledge" that 9-11 was a false flag operation. Persons who call for more investigation and stronger evidence before accepting the 9-11 truther position are neither morons, nor idiots, nor intellectually dishonest nor liars, nor fools-- not even close. 9-11 truthers who categorically assert that there can be only one reasoned explanation and conclusion with respect to 9-11 are (in our view) simply incorrect. The evidence is far too scattered, and superficial, and incomplete for this sort of "close the door" thinking. Reasonable minds CAN differ about the meaning and interpretation of the 9-11 evidence, and it's noteworthy that even the most convinced truthers offer no definitive conclusion as to the critically important "who, how, and why" questions of responsibility and culpability for the asserted acts. Indeed, if there is a single lesson to be drawn from the debate here at BreakTheMatrix, it is that reasonable minds DO differ on these matters. All the ad hominem attacks in the world are not going to change that.
Second, we perceive that a truther "attack" approach hurts and hinders the 9-11 truth seeking process itself, and the freedom movement as a whole. Perhaps it's trite to say this, but ad hominem attack is no substitute for reasoned discourse, and it is certainly not a strategy that is likely to win converts from among the not yet committed. An attack strategy is divisive within the freedom movement, and counterproductive in the effort to create a broad transpartisan community with genuine political power. And finally, we perceive that the appearance and expression of an attack mentality is the very thing which creates opportunity for GENUINE adversaries (neocons, MSM, and such) to marginalization our movement to the fringe. Some truthers may disagree, but this is our BreakTheMatrix view, and we have no intention of approaching 9-11 differently than we handle any other issue. Reasoned discourse, civility, good manners in addressing the differing views of others-- these things are at the core of all that we are seeking to achieve here.
For those of you who enjoy the chat on BTM TV, we apologize-- one of the angry truthers took it upon himself to spam the room. We'll be back up shortly; it's nothing to worry about; and we're confident the incident was merely an aberration. But maybe even something as silly as an angry spammer offers a lesson. And to the extent that it does, we believe the lesson is this-- chill out freedom lovers; those among us who disagree with you are not the enemy.
- Rick Williams's blog
- Login or register to post comments
- 1733 reads
Propaganda A conscious systematic, and organized effort designed. . . to manipulate or influence the dicisions, actions or beliefs of a large number of people in a specified direction on a controversial issue.
Censorship 1. Counterintelligence achieved by banning or deleting any information of value to the enemy.
Seems the resemblance is remarkable
I'll take a chance and dive into this very controversial thread. By creating a subject title such as "Are 9/11 truthers welcome here?" you must have known that this would cause a somewhat heated debate and much controversy. Because the subject title in itself already assumes that 9-11 truthers are unwelcome and therefore outcasts of society (which is true to a certain extent about the outcast part). You might as well have asked: Are people who question authority welcome here? or: Are people who disbelieve this corrupt administration for all its lies welcome here? or: Are people who are dying right now because the EPA lied on the 9-11 events welcome here? or: Are the thousands of experts who say the 9-11 events do not match the official story welcome here? I believe that this article was started in order to generate buzz, which is fine by me! I just wanted to state my views on it...
-Kenny
War is Peace
Freedom is Slavery
Ignorance is Strength
First of all I want to say that you broke one of your first rules in your post. I thought there would be no profanity on this site, doesn't help that other peoples posts using it are repeated instead of deleted. On that issue I really think in these instances where you're trying to make a serious point and use profanity, you probably shouldn't be limited to do so. Just my opinion, but of course I don't own this site.
As for the 9/11 truth folk, I welcome their perspective and I must admit that I am in their camp. I don't feel uncomfortable when discussing a situation like that happening in this country. We can go down the list of instances where false flag operations happened and even recently we are hearing in the mainstream that the Anthrax incident was an inside job and in my opinion false flag as it called out the US and their Israel allies and demonized the Islamic race.
It would be silly to even consider censoring 9/11 truthers from presenting their evidence or promoting their films. It isn't hurting anyone and it is promoting an open minded environment. What worries me most about this site is its open-mindedness and its feeling that we need to censor issues that might make us look like kooks instead of talking about them like adults. I've personally been censored on this site and had broken none of the sites rules. The mention of Alex Jones alone invokes prejudice in some of you. Get over it! He had Ron Paul on the other day giving exclusive announcements on his show. Funny how some of these same people can sit through a Wolf Blitzer interview on CNN or a Sean Hannity interview on Fox News with no problems. Start censoring and ignoring your allies now and this whole thing will be dead on arrival or at least a heck of a lot harder.
Excuse our exasperation, but if it wasn't so obvious then it wouldn't be so frustrating. Instead of acting holier-than-thou, you should be looking at the evidence:
Visit video.google.com and search for Firefighter John Schroeder's first person tell-all from what happened within the towers:
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=53815767687186956
Or search for Willy Rodreguez' video from what happened:
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=7790984635879352453
Don't tell me you've already seen the evidence and are open minded about the possibility. It is insanely obvious to anyone who has looked at the evidence. I don't buy the suggestion that BTM isn't ready for it yet. Because squashing the topic on BTM runs contrary to whatever it is that you are pretending to stand for.
Don't forget to watch Barry jennings Account. (Search google video for Barry Jennings.)
Or visit his uncut interview's here: http://www.infowars.com/?p=3233
After listening to Schroeder's, Rodreguez' and Jennings' first person account of what happened inside those buildings then there should be no question about the events of that day.
Remember, these are are the men who were actually inside the buildings! Their stories are confirming of eachother. Everything from dead bodies (dozens of stories away from the "scene of the crime.") to stairwells collapsing, to continual explosions throughout the event -- even in wtc 6.
What are you going to believe, BTM? This is not a philosophical debate over BTM's image.
This is about raw information. I challenge any staff member to watch those interviews and then maintain that "reasonable minds CAN differ about the meaning [of the evidence.]"
Because they can't. No reasonable mind can justify that. Wake up.
Troy points to some significant pieces of evidence and concludes that reasonable minds cannot possibly differ with his. And indeed, if the accounts cited by Troy were the only evidence involved in a 9-11 analysis, he might be right. But a fair minded 9-11 analysis requires consideration of a massive body of evidence involving multiple aircraft; multiple locations; and an endless array of questions that are as yet unanswered (among others, the critically important "who, how and why" questions). Troy is free to reach whatever conclusion he chooses; relying on such evidence as he finds persuasive. But others are entitled to the same degree of freedom of thought as Troy, and I continue to believe it is simply incorrect to say there can be "no question" about the events of 9-11. R
But I see this position becoming a minority after the next one; which by the way Cheney was busted planning. Oh, and the new found i-9/11 information for the net that will be the 'reason' for the filtered censorship. http://www.infowars.com/?p=3753
Oh man, I know, that good news for you ehh?
Censorship on 9-11 truth arguments and evidence? Not happening here. But I respectfully disagree with people who argue that the 9-11 case is "closed" and I certainly don't view those who view the evidence as unsettled/incomplete as idiots or anything remotely like that. R
And that is the reason so many people are presenting evidence that will eventually build into a new criminal investigation.
"and I certainly don't view those who view the evidence as unsettled/incomplete as idiots or anything remotely like that. "
I agree, but in this instance 'you' are the only one using such terminology.
The link I provided has nothing to do with 9/11 per se.
It covers the 'documents' of the plan to install filtration net wide of all 'sensitive' subjects.
Most of the subjects talked about here at BTM will fall under this category, including 9/11.
While I think that filtration of certain selective subjects would please you personally, I will defend BTMs right to have a voice just a vehemently as I do subjects concerning 9/11.
I know that freedom of speech in measure is BS. Its either all or nothing, including your enemies right to expression.
I don't mind the cursing, and I don't mind the ad hominem attacks. You're going to get a certain degree of that on almost any issue in nearly every forum. I do not like, however, the refusal to digest opposing viewpoints and at least entertain the points that are being raised rather than immediately go on the defensive, or the offensive. We deal with enough of that with our elected officials, and I suppose that that we copy what we see. But debate is futile if the participants are just talking when it's their turn and then thinking of their next point instead of listening when the other participants have the floor.
some of the most open minds have closed doors.
"What luck for Rulers that Men do not think" - Hitler
agreed.
"A Government that is big enough to supply you with everything you need, is big enough to take everything you have." – Thomas Jefferson
For 9/11 Truth Advocates:
I haven't been reading all of the 911 forums because most of it is just bickering. But after reading what Rick pointed it, I felt I should say something.
I am a 9/11 Truth advocate. And I have to say that if that is true that some of you have been saying those things to other people, that needs to stop NOW. Even the leaders of the 9/11 Truth movement have requested that everyone calm down and talk with people. I know we're angry at what our government did to us. I know it's frustrating that many people won't take the time to learn the truth. It amazes me too, that so many people distrust the MSM and Bush Administration for lying to the people, yet when it concerns 9/11, suddenly they trust MSM.
I know how frustrating it is, and I feel the same way, but there is NO reason to spout these insulting comments to those that don't know the truth. Saying those nasty words will only harden their hearts and drive them farther away. It solves nothing.
If any other truth advocates are reading this, I am trying to get a show slot on BTM right now. After being a guest on Miss Green's show, I would like to finish covering Cancer and B17 first, but if it is still in high demand, I will take a few show slots to cover 9/11. I'll cover the investigation and evidence presented by Alex Jones, Dr. David Griffin, Dr. Steven Jones, and many others of the ever-growing list of scholars for 9/11 truth:
http://twilightpines.com//index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=37&I...
Let's keep pushing for the freedom movement to continue, and the smoking gun of 9/11 will reveal itself as the truth rises.
"Our country is now geared to an arms economy bred in an artificially induced psychosis of war hysteria and an incessant propoganda of fear." -Gen. Douglas McArthur
I agree with you, there is no need to hurl insults. Moreover, there is no need to waste time.
The problem that I have accepting the 9-11 truth movement has nothing to do with insults, physics, or even a "9-11 Truth advocate" wasting our time by using this forum to get a show on BTM. My problem is that if you dedicate your time to de-bunking 9-11 and exposing it, you will not have time to spend on the bigger issue. It would be like hunting a rabbit while a bear is hunting you.I would prefer not to be eaten by the bear.
I am more concerned with restoring our Republic and it requires all of our effort. Do not misunderstand me. 9-11 is a tragedy and there is no greater shame than killing the innocent. Could our government do it? Of course! They have done much worse in our history. We must unite under one common goal and focus our collective energy on it.
I love my country so much that I am willing to fight our government for her! I hope that we can put aside our petty egos, selfishness, and pride. Our country needs us.
"A Government that is big enough to supply you with everything you need, is big enough to take everything you have." – Thomas Jefferson
by my estimation at least, is 95 years worth of corruption, greed, and filth in government to clean up. It's a hugely daunting task because not only do we have the presidency and congress that's in so much obvious need, but the judicial system as well is increasingly (again imo) making questionable decisions. I can't blame people for wanting to "hunt the rabbit while a bear is hunting you". The "rabbit" gives them something to immediately focus on because it automatically sets off the bullshit meter. If they're willing to dig past it and investigate other things where the dot's don't quite connect then eventually they're going to realize the "bear" is there.
I agree with you whole heartedly. Restoring our republic is the most important goal we should have, and i believe with all my heart if all of us were to unite and put 100% of our concentrated energy on that then the real truth of 9/11 will come out. It seems sometimes that the 9/11 movement can't see the forest for the trees, and believe me i understand fully the anger and mistrust over 9/11 but it's just the tip of the iceberg to all the lies and deceit that have got us to the point we're at today.
"What luck for Rulers that Men do not think" - Hitler
Right on Izult!
"A Government that is big enough to supply you with everything you need, is big enough to take everything you have." – Thomas Jefferson
That's what I get for posting something that has some damn reason in it. Encouraging those believing the offical story to do more research, and encouraging the 9/11 truthers to be a bit more professional. I can see the nastiness in what you wrote there Coronado. "wasting time using this forum to get a show"... I never used this forum to do anything as such. Here I am, wanting to show people the truth on BTM, and you gotta' ridicule me for it? It's so nice for one serious 911 truth activists to give another such bulls**t. That really makes you look like d**k.
So I get s**t from the people who believe the offical conspiracy theory... and I get s**t from the 9/11 truthers... from multiple areas of BTM. Wth do you people want to happen here? This is ridiculous, and this is the last time I post anything on BTM forums. I've had enough. If this crap keeps up more, I'm leaving this to go to freedom.tv. Maybe they'll be able to hold a solid group together.
My goal is to get the truth and knowledge out to people. If I wanted to listen to four-year-olds fight, I'd work in a daycare.
I feel your pain here. The last stage of truth is before us, let us press on, and burn the midnight oil deep into the morning time.
Do you kiss your mama with that mouth??? I sincerely hope you find peace with yourself.
"A Government that is big enough to supply you with everything you need, is big enough to take everything you have." – Thomas Jefferson
"Anybody that's really trying to speak the truth in this world has no interest in focusing on a group, or even an individual. What they try to focus on is the problem in general, outside of any group or individual that may be manifesting the symptoms of the problem."
This is true. If you want your freedom, if you want to spread the truth, you need to understand this.
The quote is taken from this video, 2nd in a 3 part series showing how NLP (Neuro Linguistic Programming) techniques are used in the media; in this specific case, Faux News & Sean Hannity.
http://hk.youtube.com/watch?v=XYZu2Fudp4U&NR=1
This doesn't mean that your average person on an internet forum who is throwing about insults is definitely doing it intentionally, but I wouldn't rule it out, either. Everyone takes their programming differently. If you are aware of it happening, you can make the choice to dismiss it as not being credible by refusing to allow yourself to indulge it. Feel free to point out to the Sean Hannitys of the world that you're not interested in letting their imposed propaganda affect you, if you like, but do it civilly and cut the tie.
http://projectawake.ning.com
That we keep to RP's message of Freedon, Peace and Prosperity anything else should be frowned upon. Even if you are a "truther" realize that scaring people is not the best way to get your foot in the door, so to speak. Keep the "truther" movement to their own rally's the Rally for the Republic is a Ron Paul rally not a "truther" one!
I'm not trying to scare anyone, the facts are just speaking for themselves. I demonstrated government complicity and prior knowledge of the 9/11 attacks through documentation and within the paradigm of the official story.
I didn't touch upon the use of explosives in WTC 1 or 2 (WTC7 is not up for debate, as per the Silverstein confession), the use of missles, Tesla technology directed energy, CGI holograms, Reptilians, or the Jews.
Ron Paul supports a new investigation of 9/11, and that investigation would probably yield these facts. That is part of Freedom, Peace, and Prosperity. Freedom from tyranny, peace from dirty covert blackops, and prosperity because, well, you know... Ron Paul, and stuff.
9/11 is only a conspiracy in the legal statute context of the word.
lol, what's a reptilian?
I have never heard RP say he supported a new investigation. If you have any video of that, I'd like to see it. I have heard him say that if the people want it, they can have it. So he won't stop us from having one like the Bush Administration is (and like the Obama administration will... and oh yes, he'll win it... if you can see what's really going on between the two parties, Obama has been selected to be the face of the IMF and NWO).
a youtube clip a while back of Ron Paul saying he supported a new investigation on a radio show interview
It's not hard to find -- simple search on you tube
The Popular Mechanics article is bunk, since it was written by the nephew of DHS Head Cherttoff.
Since there is still skepticism as to the level of complicity within the US Government in regards to the attacks of 9/11, I have decided to provide these documents and raw video. The points they make are irrefutable. Please try to discredit them. This is a call to skeptics, please challenge what I have. I don't think you'll be able to. I will not veer away from the official story of al-qaeda or osama bin laden. In fact, it is important that the attacks were carried out by Al-Qaeda and bin Laden, because that means it was DEFINITELY an inside job.
Allow me to elaborate:
Osama bin Laden is a CIA Asset named Tim Osman
http://www.federaljack.com/modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=142
Al-Qaeda is a slang term for a database of informants and assets run by western intelligence agencies. British Foreign Secretary Robin Cook revealed this fact, before he died of a heart attack. However, paramedics responding called it a broken neck.
http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=viewArticle&code=BUN20051...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robin_Cook#Death_and_conflicting_reports
The W-199i Executive Order issued by George W Bush pulled FBI agents off the trail of Al-Qaeda, and threatened them with arrest if they pursued it. The FBI Agent on the trail of Al-Qaeda most affected by this order, John O'Neil, was put in charge of security at the WTC. His first day was on 9/11. He died.
w199i document
http://www.federaljack.com/modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=141
john oneil biography
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_P._O'Neill
MOVIE: Who killed John ONeil?
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=5802098235622738454
Combine that with the $100,000 from the Pakistani ISI to Muhammed Atta,
http://www.globalresearch.ca/articles/CHO206A.html
and that Atta was a CIA drug smuggler,
http://www.madcowprod.com/02212006.html
and just for kicks lets throw in the BBC reporting the fall of WTC7 a full twenty minutes before it fell...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ejjySUVOGKA
and baby, you got a stew goin!
http://stew.ytmnd.com/
I am sure every "truther" has reas this report from popular mechanics and addressed what was in it.
I haven't looked at 9-11 "stuff" since '04. I think I'll read this report today while sipping latte in the back yard...
""""""""From the moment the first airplane crashed into the World Trade Center on the morning of September 11, 2001, the world has asked one simple and compelling question: How could it happen?
Three and a half years later, not everyone is convinced we know the truth. Go to Google.com, type in the search phrase "World Trade Center conspiracy" and you'll get links to an estimated 628,000 Web sites. More than 3000 books on 9/11 have been published; many of them reject the official consensus that hijackers associated with Osama bin Laden and Al Qaeda flew passenger planes into U.S. landmarks.
Healthy skepticism, it seems, has curdled into paranoia. Wild conspiracy tales are peddled daily on the Internet, talk radio and in other media. Blurry photos, quotes taken out of context and sketchy eyewitness accounts have inspired a slew of elaborate theories: The Pentagon was struck by a missile; the World Trade Center was razed by demolition-style bombs; Flight 93 was shot down by a mysterious white jet. As outlandish as these claims may sound, they are increasingly accepted abroad and among extremists here in the United States.
To investigate 16 of the most prevalent claims made by conspiracy theorists, POPULAR MECHANICS assembled a team of nine researchers and reporters who, together with PM editors, consulted more than 70 professionals in fields that form the core content of this magazine, including aviation, engineering and the military.""""""""
I am doing my best to look into the claims of the 9/11 Truth movement and evaluate them as objectively as I can. So far, I have agreed with some claims and remain unconvinced of others.
One thing that even Rick, who is under a lot of attack, agrees on is that there should be a new, independent investigation. I agree as well. At least there should be televised hearings so that the American people can be exposed to the claims, the evidence, and the arguments of every theory and do THEIR best to determine what they believe and what they don't.
That being said, I think that those who have been researching this since perhaps 9/12/01 have to change their approach to making their case. Whether it's fair or not, the vast majority of people think that "9/11 Truthers are nutcases." That doesn't make it true. The vast majority of people also seem to believe that wealth is created by consumption, instead of production. All of those people believing it doesn't make THAT true either, as we are soon to very painfully learn.
However, if you are blowing your stack at BTM members and staff, who are much more open to your theories than the average American, you are doomed. Of course anyone is going to challenge your claims. No claim is worth believing unless it stands up to challenge. To the extent that I have done so, it has been out of general INTEREST in what you are saying. If I wasn't interested, I would ignore you. You learn in sales that objections are BUYING SIGNALS. That is your prospect's way of saying "CONVINCE ME." When they are not interested, they don't raise objections, they simply say "I'm not interested" or hang up, if you are calling by phone.
If you cannot keep your cool when answering well-meant challenges to your assertions from true freedom lovers like Rick or others here, you will NEVER win your fight. What happens when you start getting a foothold and you have to deal with the Bill O'Reilly's and Sean Hannity's of the world? If you lose your cool with them, and the public perceives that they "got to you," then you lose in the court of public opinion, no matter how right you may be and how wrong they may be, no matter how well-reasoned your argument is and how devoid of reason the "argument" made by a Bill O'Reilly is.
I would take Ron Paul as an example. This man has been right for 30 years about where our economy and republic are headed. He has been characterized as a nut, a racist, a UFO crazy, and all manner of other things - all unjustified. He still practices good manners and civility, even in the face of absolute nonsense, and make his argument without insult or reproach.
What friends of mine have said is "I heard this guy was a nut, but when I heard him speak, he didn't sound so nuts to me." THat is his winning secret. His presentation says, "You have heard that I am crazy. You see now that I am not foaming at the mouth, I am not ranting and raving, I am not alleging grand conspiracies or appealing to your emotions. I am here to tell you the truth and if you consider my argument, you will see that it is difficult not to agree with it. I will leave it to you why so many people have tried to characterize me as something I am not - perhaps they are afraid of what I have to say. You have seen the results my opponents have acheived with their policies, I am advocating the policies that follow our founding principles, the ones that made us great."
My advice, for what it's worth, is to make every effort to adopt the same persona as he does when making your case. Flying off the handle and calling people names only gives the O'Reilly's of the world something to work with in smearing you. Take that away and he has to try to attack your case on its merits, where you believe you will win. It is the same with the average American. They certainly don't want to believe your claims. If they can write you off as nutcases, it is much easier for them than confronting your case and attacking it on its merits. Just like a physical fight, the one that keeps his cool has an advantage. Once the other side starts to feel like you are winning the debate, or at least scoring points, they panic, and it is THEY that appear unglued to the casual observer -who is your target audience.
My last point is this. You may have been fighting this fight for years, and feel there is no longer any reason for you to present your evidence. That is an erroneous assumption. Most people, including me, don't know the great majority of the facts. If you don't feel like you can go back over ground that you feel is settled, then you might as well give up. You are going to have to go back over it, with people with MUCH LESS inquisitiveness then Rick or me or most other BTM members. Not to beat it over the head, but Ron Paul has been making the same argument - almost word for word when you watch old video from the 80's - for 30 years. He is just starting to get through to people. Hopefully, it will not take you that long, but you see that he still makes his case politely, answers questions that he has answered a thousand times, and always gives a little smile with his "thank you for having me on."
That is my advice - take it or leave it.
Tom Mullen
www.tommullen.net
www.myspace.com/skepticsongs
"Question with boldness even the existence of a god; because if there be one he must approve of the homage of reason more than that of blindfolded fear."
-Thomas Jefferson
I love to hear reasonable, open-minded people speak, and to read what they've written. If an attitude such as/similar to yours is a defining characteristic of a "skeptic," the world would be a better place if we had more skeptical people expressing their thoughts/ideas/opinions.