REMINDER: Kevin Ryan debates Michael Shermer today at 1pm EST - Thom Hartmann show.

From 911truth.org;

Thom Hartmann to Host 9/11 Truth Debate on Air America

On Thursday, November 8th, from 1 to 2 PM Eastern, popular progressive Air America host and author, Thom Hartmann, will host a debate between Kevin Ryan, 9/11 UL whistleblower and co-editor of the online "Journal of 911 Studies," and Michael Shermer, publisher of "Skeptic Magazine" and Executive Director of the Skeptics Society.

Click here to Listen Live at the time of the show;
http://www.airamerica.com/aarplayer/gateway

Another option here;
http://www.airamerica.com/thomhartmannpage/

Thanks for the reminder Rep...

Gunna be listening... I'm unable to record the stream though...

Link for Windows Medis Stream (saves registering) : http://winmedia.voxcdn.net/aar

---

Most importantly, Best Wishes to Kevin Ryan

NIST and their ilk are gunna be exposed for the SHAM that they have assisted in creating !!!

Agreed.

Best Wishes Kevin.

Top Down Demolition is indeed possible. And easily possible.. http://www.911blogger.com/node/11538

MP3 Download Link - Thanks Phredo !!!

Hour Two can be downloaded from... [ HERE ] - (can "Right Click" -> "Save Target As" on link) or "Copy Shortcut" and paste link in "open" on your media player !!!

---

More (including hr 3 link etc) at : http://www.620kpoj.com/cc-common/podcast.html

Thanks to Phredo for the tip !!!

Best wishes

---

***ADDED*** - Hour 3 with some excellent calls (including Abby and someone called LISA - who sounded a lot like Judy Wood LOL)

Link : [ HERE ]

WELL worth a LISTEN !!!

Thanks!

Say Hi! to Phredo for me!

He's got good website : http://911dvds.hopto.org/

The audio is definitely worth listening to. Good work Abby and the rest of the team in getting this word out.

Note Thom Hartmann HAS SEEN www.ae911truth.org and he has SEEN their video and says IT IS A FASCINATING SITE.

This IS good news.

Let's keep it up

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The CONSTITUTION is NOT going to "collapse" into pulverized dust no matter how much thermate/explosives or planes they throw at it

Yea man "Lisa" was Wood all

Yea man "Lisa" was Wood all right, I'd bet money on it! And she was saying that the buildings were destroyed in such a way that "it's not like a demolition she’s ever seen before", luckily the host cut the shill off before she could verbally defecate all over the credibility of 9/11 Truth. It was actually better that she only sounded like a skeptic who was against controlled demotion, rather than some kook who is against controlled demolition because "she believes flying pink pigs and keebler elves from space actually brought the buildings down”.

Interview with Judy Woods by Greg Jenkins ... must see! ;)

The interview below: Dr. Greg Jenkins Interviews Dr. Judy Wood ... is a must see if you haven't viewed it, LOL. Kevin should debate with Judy.

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-558096240694803017

ya

judy woods sounds like an aged hippie who took way too much acid early on. doesnt make any sense at all. hilarious that she called in trying to hint at space beam bullshit

"I will not withdraw from this war even if Laura and Barney are the only ones supporting me." -George W. Bush

Important Victories.

We neeed to win these important battles.

Even small victories when integrated together COLLECTIVELY will finally give us the breakthrough.

We have to deal with the mass delusion that has imprisoned people's minds from FACING SCIENTIFIC EVIDENCE.

The complicit like Michael Shermer have to be taken to task.

Mr Kevin Ryan, if you are reading this, I commend you for your efforts and give 'em hell!

Shame them for their lies their are spewing.

www.ae911truth.org.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The CONSTITUTION is NOT going to "collapse" into pulverized dust no matter how much thermate/explosives or planes they throw at it

Great Job

Kevin R did a great job, as a fellow engineer and statistician I commend you for not falling for the traditional bait the media likes to use, asking you to support an alternate theory and not just provide evidence supporting a new investigation. I don't think any reasonable person after listening to that debate could not support a new independant investigation.

Kevin won hands down.

Looking for Shermer's head?

Looking for Shermer's head? It's on Kevin's wall. Shermer fought like the lazy propagandist he is. He flung straw everywhere. He contradicted himself. He was utterly predictable. Kevin took the high road and dispatched Shermer using pure logic, without referencing himself or even the staggering forensic evidence he knows listeners will encounter in the Journal. Impressive victory. Thank you, Kevin.

“On the altar of God, I swear eternal hostility against all forms of tyranny over the mind of man."--Thomas Jefferson

debate

eeeeee it's not going too well so far

"I will not withdraw from this war even if Laura and Barney are the only ones supporting me." -George W. Bush

That's bad news

What's happening.?

Is Kevin Ryan unable to hold his own or are they gangin up on him with their psy-ops?

Are the scientific facts being presented or are they manipulating the show to prevent Kevin Ryan from speaking the trutn?

If this is a failure (I hope it is not), then we have to learn from our mistakes

Can you keep us updated on why it is not going too well so far?

Thanks

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The CONSTITUTION is NOT going to "collapse" into pulverized dust no matter how much thermate/explosives or planes they throw at it

kevin ryan

Kevin Ryan has managed to go for an hour and HASNT MENTIONED ANY FUCKING EVIDENCE OF THE CONTROLLED DEMOLITION. he hasnt mentioned who he is, that he is in fact a whistleblower, he didnt mention richard gage or steven jones, he didnt mention operation northwoods, he didnt mention ANY REASON WHY we SHOULD doubt that al qaeda was behind the attacks. very sad right now.

"I will not withdraw from this war even if Laura and Barney are the only ones supporting me." -George W. Bush

wow

kevin hasnt talked about WHO he is, that he underwrote the steel. HE HASNT TALKED ABOUT ANY OF THE FORENSIC EVIDENCE. MOLTEN METAL, THERMATE. TALK ABOUT STEVEN JONES. AHHHHHHHHHHH this is pathetic

"I will not withdraw from this war even if Laura and Barney are the
only ones supporting me." -George W. Bush

ae911truth.org

why not mention this website when the guy from skeptic is talking about THERE BEING NO EVIDENCE OF CONTROLLED DEMOLITION

"I will not withdraw from this war even if Laura and Barney are the only ones supporting me." -George W. Bush

Abby, I do hope you or someone else has an audio

This is not good news. Surely Mr Ryan should introduce himself, provide some historical background for his case and provid solid Evidence which is easily available.

www.ae911truth.org is AN EXCELLENT RESOURCE.

http://www.ae911truth.net/ppt/index.php

We may need to rethink our strategy if indeed this debate did not go well in favour of the truth movement.

Our spokes-people have to be clear, direct, factual and accurate using OUR MOST SOLID EVIDENCE.

It may be premature for me to make any judgement as I have not heard the debate yet and I do hope it went well.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The CONSTITUTION is NOT going to "collapse" into pulverized dust no matter how much thermate/explosives or planes they throw at it

Oh well

I was just going to say damn, I just missed it tuned in at 1:57 just in time to hear him say goodbye but from the sounds of it I'm glad I didn't hear it.

So WTF? I mean who the hell cant debate a lying ass nut bag when ALL of the PROVABLE evidence is on your side?
Reminds me of these complicit Democrats folding at every opportunity when it is they whom have the upper hand, the vast majority of Americans behind them and not to mention all of the PROVABLE evidence showing clearly that these Fascist are guilty of Election Fraud, War Crimes, Crimes against Humanity, Mass murder & TREASON yet they inevitably & quietly turn around, pull their collective pants down and bend over every phucking time. So they are either COMPLICIT in the crimes or at least the cover ups or so brain dead & worthlessly stupid that they should not be able to walk & breathe at the same time.

I guess I should actually listen to this when ever it becomes available but damn.

Abby - I just tuned in (I should be going to work, lol)

UL certified the steel, Kevin Ryan worked in the water department at UL and had nothing to do with underwriting the steel. His connection to this is because he was told by the head of UL that the company certified the steel and then received company documents verifying that fact. UL then tried to back away from this position and Kevin called them on it.

I only heard the last 20 minutes and from what I heard Kevin did ok, not great, but ok.

Thanks for all your great work in SD, I look forward to working with you in the future (I work wish Cosmos in SF).

We are winning, the truth is getting out.

I hope that you and yours are well.

The truth shall set us free. Love is the only way forward.

i dont care

that he himself didnt underwrite the steel. at least MENTION the letter and why he got fired from UL.

"I will not withdraw from this war even if Laura and Barney are the only ones supporting me." -George W. Bush

I see your point

Clearly, I need to hear this debate from the beginning to be able to adequately critique it and understand your frustration.

Mr. Ryan is a good guy, but not a professional debater, and Shermer obviously comes to this with superior verbal sparring skills. One would expect the side with the weaker case to go on the attack and try to control the debate, this is basic strategy and tactics.

All the best to my scorched neighbors to the south...

(now, I really do have to go to work, lol)

The truth shall set us free. Love is the only way forward.

Yes, you have a point

Someone does not like what we are saying and is voting us down.
I wonder why.

I agree, his background from Ul and him being forced to leave is an important point to address.

However according to Orangutan :

"Good call on putting 9/11 Blogger out there as a place to start. We will have to provide a place that backs up the truth. Also Great work on getting the whistleblower names out there. Sibel Edmonds, Patty Casazza, etc."

So at least some keynames were mentioned.

However I do agree www.ae911truth.org is POSSIBLY ONE OF OUR BEST RESOURCES TO USE TO BRING THE CASE OF CONTROLLED DEMOLITION.

I do hope it was mentioned, if not, then in the future I do hope people will consider highlighting Richard Gage's Important Work.

Any Abby thanks for your updates. Be encouraged, The Road to Victory is paved by Persistence.

If you feel like communicating with me directly, my name is Vincent, from Malaysia, e-mail me at: vsp_my2006@yahoo.com

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The CONSTITUTION is NOT going to "collapse" into pulverized dust no matter how much thermate/explosives or planes they throw at it

don't worry

i made SURE to mention ae911truth.org when i called in

"I will not withdraw from this war even if Laura and Barney are the only ones supporting me." -George W. Bush

Excellent Work

Good job.

If you still feel upset, just listen to nappo berna - sweet surrender, a beautiful piece of jazz just to drive away those NEO-CON LIARS AND THE BLUES AWAY.

You can get it from http://www.wippit.com/Nappo_Berna

or use a peer-peer software to download an mp3 just to listen. It is beautiful and soothing.

If you like it, buy it. No copyright infringement here. Just $.099.

Just awesome for those Neo-Con blues, I am listening to it right now and boy it's great.

ALL THOSE JAZZ LOVERS OUT THERE give it a try.

Peace

And don't worry we will get this guy.

And these guys.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The CONSTITUTION is NOT going to "collapse" into pulverized dust no matter how much thermate/explosives or planes they throw at it

I heard your call, GREAT!! Well done, good call.

Hey Abby,

I heard your call, GREAT!! Well done, good call. I know you are angry and it showed, it shows and that’s good too. You got the information out about William Rodriguez too and AE911 truth so that's really good.

I know that you would have said different things if you were Kevin, but try not to take it out in Kevin.

At the end of the day Kevin is attempting to get people to just ask questions, and hitting them full on with information often will not do it. He'll be made out to be a fanatic, most the people listening to Thom Hartmann and Air America are the kind of liberal intelligentsia who think they are cool and 'get it'. You know the "mother Jones" readers and members of some local neighborhood ecological action group. You might like to think of them as the controlled liberals or even liberal fascists (as my friend in Portland calls them). 9/11 truth would literally destroy them and they would reject it outright if they weren't allowed to 'discover it for themselves'. Because they are so smart you see, they have to know it already.

Stay cool,

Good Job, Kevin!

You held your own and acted in a very credible and professional way. Shermer is a master of tactics but your points won the day. Many people will now be researching you and the Journal and looking for more information! Bravo.

Shermer offers evidence of damage on South Side of Bldg 7?

It's went about as expected! Shermer held up, possibly, better than I would've forecast? The most interesting item to come out of this debate was Shermer citing photos of the South Side of Building 7 as evidence of substantial damage? It's a new one!

We'll see if there is enough gas in their tank to trot out some Photo Shop Pix that explains away of the problem of Building 7?

...don't believe them!

Debate Analysis.

It is harder than I thought to defeat a compulsive liar in a debate. Compulsive liars can obtain a level of confidence that is hard to match for some reason. I know that truth prevails, but liars seem to be able to muster more confidence than people who deal in the truth. People are seeing through the lies no doubt, but you see the challenge ahead. Most people just instinctively believe the person who seems to have more confidence in what they say. It is easier to believe them, than have to think for themselves. George Bush is a perfect example. He lies with the utmost confidence. People fell for it.

Thank you Kevin for putting a chink in these people's armor. The more we hit them the more they fall. Even Bush is finally being seen through by society at large as the liar that he is. More people will definitely wake up and choose to investigate this stuff in response to hearing this debate today on Air America. Good call on putting 9/11 Blogger out there as a place to start. We will have to provide a place that backs up the truth. Also Great work on getting the whistleblower names out there. Sibel Edmonds, Patty Casazza, etc.

The bottom line is more people are going to be discussing 9/11.

Thanks to Kevin for this work!

>>More people will definitely wake up and choose to investigate this stuff in response to hearing this debate today on Air America.

Yes, that's really the point. And the reality is also that most people see through compulsive liars and tend to connect with those who speak truth.

It takes a lot to stand up and do this stuff, to host these, etc. Everyone should be applauded who made it happen. There are very few debates like this out there so this contributes to that body. Almost all scientists are not expert debaters by definition (!), but it is important for them to be engaged in these efforts to get their name out there, to put out the facts and to go through it themselves because they will need to continue to do it.

A debate between Steven Jones and Leslie Robertson happened some time back and some were critical about it not being Steve's best work.

http://journalof911studies.com/volume/200704/Roberts_AnnotatedJones-Robe...

This is natural -- Steve is a scientist and hasn't spent his career in a spotlight or on the debate team. But many people thought he did great. I did too.

The real importance was in the fact that it happened, as this debate did, that both people on opposite sides spoke in a public forum. Leslie Robertson is not the low-life that Shermer is, however, so Kevin had a far more difficult task. But this was a turning-point event, and everyone involved did a great job in making it happen.

Disappointing to say the

Disappointing to say the least

Why not push whistleblowers, family members, the commissioners themselves who said they were lied to? The exploitation of 911 to pursue decades-old agendas.

Why go around and around debating controlled demolition?

Because it keeps us at a stalemate, that's why.

When will we learn?

/////////////////////
911dvds@gmail.com - $1 DVDs shipped - email for info

I JUST GOT ON!

I just got on and mentioned as much of the evidence as I could in ten seconds

"I will not withdraw from this war even if Laura and Barney are the only ones supporting me." -George W. Bush

Good job, Abby!

Actually, my MP3 recording link at the end of the comments section doesn't have the phone call segment of the debate (third hour). I actually thought the debate ended with Thom Hartman, Kevin Ryan, and Michael Shermer! Sorry!

actually controlled demolition

is BY FAR the strongest evidence we have, it is irrefutable, it has been scientifically proven and we have 100s of eye witnesses that all corroborate each other.
If you cant win the Controlled demolition debate then just STFU about anything else.

Show "where has it been" by DHS

Steven Jones

has proven Thermate was used, and the Laws of Physics proves there is no way in phucking hell those buildings could possibly have collapsed without the use of explosives.
There is no way that multi ton steel beams could have even theoretically been blown away from those buildings all the way across West 57th St some 400-600' away without the use of explosives.
There are hundred of eye witnesses that all say the exact same thing, huge explosions from the basement up.
It is 100% impossible for 95+% of the concrete and various other materials could have been pulverized into talcum powder fine dust without the use of Explosives.

Shall I go on? because that's just off top of my head in 30 seconds.

Yes!!!!!!!

Science SPEAKS!!!!!!!

To quote:

"There is no way that multi ton steel beams could have even theoretically been blown away from those buildings all the way across West 57th St some 400-600' away without the use of explosives.
There are hundred of eye witnesses that all say the exact same thing, huge explosions from the basement up.
It is 100% impossible for 95+% of the concrete and various other materials could have been pulverized into talcum powder fine dust without the use of Explosives.

Shall I go on? because that's just off top of my head in 30 seconds." End quote.

Well said.

We can win debates in seconds or minutes. I have done so myself.

The evidence is overwhelming. Skeptics take a second look with a scientific mind.

To quote one 911 Truther at Ground Zero in NYC, even a chimpanzee can tell that IT WAS CONTROLLED DEMOLITION.

Only problem is that people STILL LISTEN TO THIS GUY.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The CONSTITUTION is NOT going to "collapse" into pulverized dust no matter how much thermate/explosives or planes they throw at it

that picture is

that picture is disturbing
--
Truth Revolution: The Eleventh of Every Month

Wow!

Bush looks hot!!!

What!

Thats the ugliest thing I have EVER seen! :)

Just kidding. Hope you found it funny!

I could not help myself when I first saw it, just had to have you guys look at it.

Let me know if you had laugh, I may be getting complaints and have to pull it (Not Silverstein Style) if it offends the powers that be.

Smile and have a good day.

Things are really heating up right now and while we have to be serious in these serious times we do need to lighten up and have a good laugh sometimes.

Just listening to FOX TALK with the "HONOURABLE" Alan Colmes- also known as Sean the Vannity's sidekick in the War Crimes of the State(Iraq, 911 Cover-up, War on Freedom, oops I mean War on Terror etc).

He had just interviewed the even "MORE HONOURABLE" John Bolton - former Ambassador to the UN etc etc HIGH Priest of Neo Cons, who has usual is singing BOMB BOMB IRAN and claims RUSSIA & CHINA WON'T DO A THING.

Amazing. So I do think that picture does speak volumes.

That is THEIR LEADER. Not Yours or mine.

Trust me, I like many others, know people in various governments.

Russia, China, Japan, and all the .....Stans- Uzbekistan, Kazakhstan, Pakistan, Turkey,Venenzuela will NOT DO nothing.

The Jap opposition has just forced the removal of support for the "Afghan Terror War"(i.e. refueling of US Naval War machine in the Indian Ocean recently).

911 Mysteries HAS been shown on Japanese TV.

Lots and Lots of people here in Asia KNOW.

And are not happy.

It is all about Humpty Dumpty and ALL the Kings men.

How long does Lord Bush think he can go on?

Infinite Hubris? Not with this

http://www.reuters.com/article/bondsNews/idUSN0754579020071107

http://www.currencytrading.net/2007/7-countries-considering-abandoning-t...

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The CONSTITUTION is NOT going to "collapse" into pulverized dust no matter how much thermate/explosives or planes they throw at it

A gay antique dealer...

...near where I live looks exactly like this, minus the rack. At first, I was trying to figure out why his picture was in a comment at 911b.

--
"But truthfully, I don't really know. We've had trouble getting a handle on Building No. 7."
~~ Dr. Shyam Sunder - Acting Dir. of Buiding and Fire Research Laboratory (NIST)
"We are unable to provide a full explanation of the total collapse." (NIST)

Well its a joke

Did you find it funny?

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The CONSTITUTION is NOT going to "collapse" into pulverized dust no matter how much thermate/explosives or planes they throw at it

Its a joke

It's just a joke from a political humour website.

Well if you are offended I will remove it.

Apologies to anyone who did not like it. Just thought we could at least laugh at something.

Let me know.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The CONSTITUTION is NOT going to "collapse" into pulverized dust no matter how much thermate/explosives or planes they throw at it

Simple.

Fire and debris damage cannot cause the sudden, almost symmetrical collapse of steel-framed buildings in the path of most resistance - through dozens of undamaged concrete and steel floors - without slowing down.

Here is Physical Proof for Controlled Demolition of the WTC

A truly vital piece of evidence that provides definitive proof that the World Trade Center towers were brought down by controlled demolition are the videos of yellow-hot molten metal seen cascading off the South Tower (World Trade Center Tower 2).

That piece of evidence isn't merely a smoking gun: it's a smoking nuclear cannon. Those videos, alone and by themselves, are irrefragable *proof* that the South Tower (at the very least) had thermite-like ("like" in the sense of producing comparable temperatures) incendiary demolition charges with the ability to easily slice through structural steel going off within it. There is no innocent explanation for what those videos record.

That is to say, the only way to get around that it is thermite which is causing that yellow-hot metal to cascade off the South Tower before its collapse would be to posit that we are seeing a different form of extremely powerful incendiary with thermite-like temperatures at work in the videos. Of which, even if true, would be every bit as much damning, since no such powerful incendiaries can be accounted for without involving a sinister intent to plant them there.

Below are videos which contain some of this footage:

"Shot from street level of South Tower collapsing," CameraPlanet http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-2991254740145858863

http://www.supportthetruth.com/vids/thermite.wmv
http://www.plunder.com/Video-of-Thermite-on-9-11-at-the-W-T-C-and-Physic...

http://www.checktheevidence.com/911/Molten%20Metal%20from%20WTC.mpg

"Wtc 1, impact site close up, tower collapse close up, long shot, people shouting," CameraPlanet http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-8564772103237441151

From the color of the yellow-hot molten metal seen cascading off the South Tower, it had to be at least over 1000 °C, yet jet fuel burns in open air at 260-315 °C; nor do burning office, building, or plane materials impart temperatures anywhere near that hot to structural members (indeed, it would present quite a hazard if such articles were constructed with such powerful incendiaries, and so designers of such objects go out of their way to make sure that they are not). Thus, if it wasn't molten iron from thermite that we are seeing come off the South Tower, then by necessity a reaction source with a heat intensity very much like thermite had to be present. Yet there is nothing in the U.S. government's account that can explain such a heat source; indeed, there's nothing innocent that could explain it, since it requires some sort of extremely powerful incendiary.

For more on this, see Steven E. Jones's (Ph.D.; physicist and archaeometrist; former professor in the Department of Physics and Astronomy, Brigham Young University) below paper:

"Why Indeed Did the WTC Buildings Completely Collapse?," Dr. Steven E. Jones, Journal of 911 Studies, Vol. 3 (September 2006) http://www.journalof911studies.com/volume/200609/Why_Indeed_Did_the_WTC_...
http://www.physics.byu.edu/research/energy/Papers/J6p2%20.doc (Older version.)

See also:

"Experiments to test NIST 'orange glow' hypothesis," Steven E. Jones, Ph.D., August 31, 2006 http://www.scholarsfor911truth.org/Experiments-to-test-NIST-orange-glowh...
http://www.scholarsfor911truth.org/Liquid_Aluminum_011.mpg
http://www.scholarsfor911truth.org/Liquid_Aluminum_012.mpg

"Experiments with Molten Aluminum," Steven E. Jones with Wesley Lifferth, Jared Dodson, Jacob Stevenson and Shannon Walch, circa June 2006 http://www.scholarsfor911truth.org/ExptAlMelt.doc

"A description of molten aluminum poured onto rusty steel," Wes Lifferth, Physics Shop, Brigham Young University, Journal of 9/11 Studies, Vol. 9 (March 2007) http://www.journalof911studies.com/volume/200703/Molten_Aluminum_Poured_...

Moreover, even the official FEMA scientists Jonathan Barnett, Ronald R. Biederman, and R. D. Sisson, Jr. bolster the evidence that thermate (i.e., thermite with sulfur added, which causes it to slice through steel even faster by forming a eutectic alloy with it) was used to bring down the WTC towers (see "Appendix C: Limited Metallurgical Examination" in World Trade Center Building Performance Study: Data Collection, Preliminary Observations, and Recommendations, Federal Emergency Management Agency, FEMA 403, May 2002 http://www.fema.gov/pdf/library/fema403_apc.pdf ):

""
Evidence of a severe high temperature corrosion attack on the steel, including oxidation and sulfidation with subsequent inter granular melting, was readily visible in the near-surface microstructure. ... No clear explanation for the source of the sulfur has been identified. The rate of corrosion is also unknown.
""

And in the below paper it is conclusively proved via chemical analysis using wavelength dispersive X-ray spectroscopy (WDS), scanning electron microscopy (SEM), and X-ray energy dispersive spectroscopy (X-EDS) that large quantities of thermite analogs (such as thermate) were used in the destruction of the World Trade Center towers:

"Revisiting 9/11/2001--Applying the Scientific Method," Dr. Steven E. Jones, Journal of 911 Studies, Vol. 11 (May 2007) http://www.journalof911studies.com/volume/200704/JonesWTC911SciMethod.pdf

____________
"Terrorism is the health of the State."--James Redford, author of "Jesus Is an Anarchist," June 1, 2006 http://praxeology.net/anarchist-jesus.pdf

Excellent point

Boy do I agree with you Nunyabiz.

www.ae911truth.org

Controlled Demolition is one the Key Pillars we have.

Richard Gage's Team will win this for us.

Sooner or later.

And for those guys trying to vote abby and myself down, pls reconsider.

We are not attacking Kevin Ryan, just asking some questions and making some points.

I for not have not heard the debate yet and will most definitely listen to it once there is an audio of it posted somewhere.

Kevin Ryan had done a lot of good for this movement and I am sure even if he did not come out strong on this debate there will be more debates.

We take it one step at a time.

Cheers

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The CONSTITUTION is NOT going to "collapse" into pulverized dust no matter how much thermate/explosives or planes they throw at it

thanks

its sad to get censored when you are just trying to express an opinion of frustration. obviously i respect and honor kevin ryan for all of his hard work and efforts in this movement, i was just upset that the other guy wasnt shot down as easily as he should have been

"I will not withdraw from this war even if Laura and Barney are the only ones supporting me." -George W. Bush

What show were you listening to?

Or did you even listen? He mentioned a lot of that, including Patty Casazza's recent disclosures.

wtcdemolition.com/blog

Confidence in our Movement.

The bottom line is we need to pummel them with confidence. We can pummel them with science when science is needed. But we need to pummel them with confidence when debates or popular culture is concerned. Sander Hicks is capable of speaking passionately and with confidence. I've seen him do it. We need the people with the most confidence and the ability to float facts through their minds with razor sharp accuracy and timing to represent us in debates, etc. I am saying we all have different strengths. Good call into Thom Hartmann if that was you Abby. Damn.

thanks :)

"I will not withdraw from this war even if Laura and Barney are the only ones supporting me." -George W. Bush

Off topic.

Abby, let us know if any SD truthers got clobbered by the recent fires, lost homes, etc.

That's Right

I am sure we are all concerned. Do let us know how the SD Truthers are holding up.

We can at least keep them in our prayers.

Only problem now another fire has started.

The collapsing dollar is another issue and more people may lose their homes due to the sub-prime mortgage crisis, the debt and overall confidence of the dollar as a de-facto world currency.

This is a serious matter not covered here but if i may mention it, pls look at this.

US debt tops $9 trillion for first time-Treasury
http://www.reuters.com/article/bondsNews/idUSN0754579020071107

7 Countries Considering Abandoning the US Dollar (and what it means)
http://www.currencytrading.net/2007/7-countries-considering-abandoning-t...

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The CONSTITUTION is NOT going to "collapse" into pulverized dust no matter how much thermate/explosives or planes they throw at it

everyone here is safe

all fellow freedom fighters are safe here, but i feel very sad for everyone who wasn't as lucky.

"I will not withdraw from this war even if Laura and Barney are the only ones supporting me." -George W. Bush

That's good to hear

Victory is On the Way.

Just Hang On.

If you have a chance to talk to the LA WeAreChangers pls say Malaysia says hello and a Job MOST WELL DONE.

We can never underestimate what a few dedicated individuals can do.

This is the mistake the Neo-Cons have made.

The numbers are growing.

Sooner or later, people will see the Emperor HAS no clothes.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The CONSTITUTION is NOT going to "collapse" into pulverized dust no matter how much thermate/explosives or planes they throw at it

Kevin was fine

I listened to the second half of the show. I think Kevin had the right tone for the show. He asked people to go look for themselves and Tom agreed with Kevin although he obviously knows that he is approaching the 3rd rail of his employment.

Its not easy debating a circus clown.

I only caught the second half of the interview and have attached the audio below . . .MS didn't mention area 51 or the Bermuda triangle but covered everything else.

November 8, 2007 Partial 911 Debate Thom Hartmann Show Between Scientist and Circus Clown
http://www.alexjonesfan58.com/mp3/20071108_911debate_hartmann.mp3

October 24, 2007 Architect for Truth Richard Gage on WTIC Drive Time Radio
http://www.alexjonesfan58.com/mp3/20071024_WTIC_richardgage.mp3

September 28, 2007 CIA Analyst Ray McGovern Calls 9/11 "Cover-Up and Joke" on KPFA Flashpoints
http://www.alexjonesfan58.com/mp3/20070928_flashpoints_raymcgovern.mp3

Septemer 7, 2007 C-Span Washington Journal Listeners Comment On New Bin Laden Tape
http://www.alexjonesfan58.com/mp3/20070907_cspan_washingtonjournal.mp3

August 25, 2007 David Ray Griffin on Clout - Air America Radio
http://www.alexjonesfan58.com/mp3/20070825_clout_griffin.mp3

Thanks for posting that

made me feel a wee bit better, Kevin didn't do "that" bad at least in that last 20mins.
He did however drop the ball on a few points that he could have easily slammed Shumer on because every single argument Shumer tried to make was the same tired old crap we ALL have heard a 1000X and refuted 1001X.
Personally I would have hit Shumer a LOT harder and made him stutter and stammer, shove facts down his throat and make him choke on them.

Thanks for the links, alexjonesfan!

Thank you for the links, it's much appreciated!

...don't believe them!

I only caught about 8 minutes .

From what I heard it sounded like the usual though. Any mention of Indira Singh and her experience? Isn't Kevin a "whistle blower " also? Didn't hear Kevin give the exact reason Rex Tomb couldn't give for a Bin Laden/FBI connection. There is a stated reason that would help very much to speak about. confession tape of Bin Laden and the fact that it WAS Bin Laden on the tape but that the experts point at the transcribed audio being full of SHIT? Or the fact that the tape was being played down because it was likely part of a sting operation which would have raised more questions about the exact covert working going on in the local region at the time, and that in itself would have brought more attention to the spliced audio? These are things that must be discussed when served ping pong lobs IMO.

Shermer sounded his same usual self though. "You guys"...."You Conspiracy types"..."Your side does this"...."What did Aliens or supernatural forces intervene"?....and so on. I'd love to take on a man with that level of arrogance in a formal debate. There would be no talking or intervention from a "host" in that case. Strictly point /counterpoint, two minutes answer time limit, allowed one follow up question and one follow up answer, no ad hominem , rhetoric, straw men, personal diversions.

I'm pissed because the people that bring up the "official story" counterpoint need to be served some hardcore cold dishes on their laps if they are going to digress to cloaked personal attacks and disingenuous logic or reason. There are more than enough people that are Masters at 9/11 findings to take out these bench warming second string "big whigs" of the skeptic world. And I say skeptic loosely.

As far as the debate goes, I can't comment more because I missed missed 95% of it. Sure hope it went better in the beginning and what I heard was a wrap up fizzle down.

I'll see if I can get an archive.

On a personal note. Some people don't have the "attack" instinct for debate. Shermer does, though passively aggressive and mixing low level taunts with "But how could you be so ridiculous, Ockham's razor...Ockham's razor...Ockham's razor".

LOL@ the term "skeptic". What an overblown self serving generic boring term to use to bring one's self into a space of "intellectual superiority". It's a fucking shame is what it is. Show me proof of YOUR EXTRAORDINARY CLAIM. Even if I believed or proved to myself that 9/11 happened exactly as it has been told, my arrogance about the matter wouldn't reach the levels it does with this self appointed community of "OCKHAM'S RAZOR" cultists.

Anywho, just rambling, sorry.

Debate

Kevin finished up well enough, and made his points in the last half of the debate. The important point was that Shermer made too many assumptions (the large amounts of explosives needed, the many people needed by the government to do the job and hush it up, that bottom-up CDs are typical etc.) all of which Kevin knocked down. Why we should believe pathogical liars for 6 years is the real question. That most of the country prefers the comfort of denial to the most likely truth, is reality. With a yearly budget of over 40 billion dollars to deliver propaganda and mischief, the Intelligence agencies are doing their best to defeat the obvious (that we've been screwed by some sociopathic, greedy SOBs). Shermer was not convincing.

Debate

Repeat entry- deleted-sorry.

Compliments, Kevin Ryan

For me, K.Ryan has done well.
His opponent wasn't an easy game.

It was a 1 on 1 debate which for 9/11-truth is always a win.

The host did bring up tens of points in favour of the alternative hypothesis.

Chill out people!!!

Although I definitely think Kevin could have been more forceful and focused on the evidence it wasn't a disaster by any means. Michael Shermer used the usual ploys of "making up facts" and diverting the issues. "So what about the USS Cole? Was the governnment to blame for that too?" FU Shermer! Kevin spoke about WTC 7 and refuted Shermer's false claims of the building collapsing from one side as well as Shermer's claim of the WTC 1 & 2 not being controlled demolitions because they were from the top down.

Most of Thom Hartmann's audience are intelligent enough to realise that Shermer was using various straw man arguments while Kevin countered with facts. It could have been much better but it certainly wasn't a defeat for the 9/11 Truth Movement.

www.cincy911.org

"A nation of sheep will beget a government of wolves" – Edward R. Murrow

Further...

It takes gall to lie for a living, Shermer. You can't deny the reality of the demolitions if you have any intellect at all! You can't deny the most able military in the world unable to respond on this day! You can't deny noone has been punished! These red flags should remind us all of how wrong it is what Shermer is doing!

...don't believe them!

Well put, Cincy911Truth!

They were straw man arguments employed by Shermer! But, I'm concerned that the arguments are not recognized as such by people who keep their consciousness in a strictly 2-D mode! They are unwilling and possibly even unable to look deeper to enter a critical 3-D mode!

"What about the USS Cole?" It sounds good, if Al Qaeda can do that than the twin towers may not be a leap? It concerns me because of the lengths and sophistication of the 9/11 event. It was an astonishing display and took great care and prep! People don't want to accept the reality of psychopaths among us, either.

No, this debate amounts to little, Cincy911Truth, but these superficial arguments do need to be addressed.

I agree, FU Shermer! I don't care how it sounds when you realize how much gall it takes to lie for a living! It takes gall to push this in one's face!

...don't believe them!

Good job, Kevin.

All this stuff about what Kevin should have said needs to be checked with a bit of common sense. When you have a one hour debate, 20 minutes of which is commercials, and the remainder of the time split between the moderator and the opponent, you just can't say everything in the 15 minutes of talking time that you may have left! Those who know the facts and questions about 9/11 realize that 12 hours is hardly enough time to present all the evidence, let alone 15 minutes. So enough of this excoriating vitriol about what he failed to mention.

Shermer sounded more like a flailing gadfly than a competent and knowledgeable expert. Kevin set him off guard immediately (which Shermer admitted) when he pointed to the head of the ISI paying off Mohammed Atta before the attacks. Shermer had no response. When Kevin pointed out the omissions and problems with the 9/11 commission report, Shermer had to change the subject completely by claiming that all the building demolition videos on Google show them blowing up from bottom up. This is about the only thing that he said of substance, and which Kevin easily refuted.

The one place where Kevin did miss an opportunity, is when Shermer claimed that there was no evidence of explosives at the WTC. He rightly noted the primary evidence, i.e., the nature of the collapse, but really could have focussed some on the supplementary evidence, especially the issues of molten metal, thermite residuals, iron-rich microspeheres, etc. Perhaps, though, he felt that getting too technical might lose some listeners, especially when he has only thirty seconds to make the point. I did hear Abby call up afterward and get these comments in, so the listeners were informed about this info.

Overall, I think that it went well. Thanks, Kevin.

rob

all i am saying is that he was given an opportunity to present EVIDENCE supporting the controlled demolition hypothesis and he failed to present ONE piece of forensic evidence or anything mentioned by ae911truth.org. I mentioned 10 points in less than 2 minutes on air.

"I will not withdraw from this war even if Laura and Barney are the only ones supporting me." -George W. Bush

Awesome!

You got it right.

Our COMBINED EFFORTS is going to BRING THEM TO JUSTICE.

Quote:

"all i am saying is that he was given an opportunity to present EVIDENCE supporting the controlled demolition hypothesis and he failed to present ONE piece of forensic evidence or anything mentioned by ae911truth.org. I mentioned 10 points in less than 2 minutes on air." End Quote.

I have not listened to the debate yet but You DID RIGHT.

Keep it up.

We have to fill in the blanks, cover the blind-spots.

It IS a TEAM EFFORT.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The CONSTITUTION is NOT going to "collapse" into pulverized dust no matter how much thermate/explosives or planes they throw at it

maybe

i am being too harsh, i just feel like this is such a great opportunity and am scared that we didnt win this one. sorry for the negativity. it is wonderful that this issue was brought to light on national radio

"I will not withdraw from this war even if Laura and Barney are the only ones supporting me." -George W. Bush

We don't need to feel like

We don't need to feel like we have lost the battle if everything we wanted said wasn't said. This is a great step forward. So what if AE911truth wasn't mentioned. Journal of 9/11 Studies was, and so was 9/11 Blogger. The genuine listeners who noted the vacuous character of Shermer's argument will be led to these places to begin their research. There they will find no shortage of solid forensic evidence to compel them as well.

One thing that's really

One thing that's really important is that it was Kevin Ryan who did this. Now *many* people have heard his name and it will stick with them permanently and will look him up and won't end up in a hoax swamp -- following up Kevin's talks, papers, etc. will lead to a solid case, and this is very important.

YES

Credibility is Very Important and having CREDIBLE people make the case is very significant.

We have to try our level best to prevent these hoax swamps or distractions and focus on the REAL SOLID Evidence there is.

Good Science. Credible Spokespeople.

Leads the way to Truth & Justice.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The CONSTITUTION is NOT going to "collapse" into pulverized dust no matter how much thermate/explosives or planes they throw at it

definately not the gentleman's debate I halfway expected

I tuned in halfway through and it sounded like Kevin Ryan's mojo was somewhat frustrated by the direction of the interview.

Shermer's approach was fairly aggressive and he repeatedly stated falsehoods, which seemed like it surprised Ryan who probably expected an honest debate. For the most part, Ryan sounded very intelligent and polite, though taken aback.

Ryan interrupted and corrected Shermer's WTC 7's collapse fabricated factoid (that the WTC 7 building collapsed exactly where the debris hit, and was not a straight up/down collapse). A few minutes later, Ryan again called out Shermer for "false speculation presented as fact".

Thom Hartmann's question and comments seemed more logical towards the very end, when he countered Shermer by saying that things HAVE worked out very well for the administration and their military corporations due to the 9-11 attacks. I was very disappointed that Thom Hartmann neglected to mention the primary role the attacks provided for the (conveniently prepared) Patriot Act, and the official destruction of American's civil liberties.

Have pity for complicit Official Conspiracy Theory parrots.

If enough listeners complained, maybe Air America would consider hosting an additional (i.e "honest") 9-11 science debate. My head was spinning from just listening to Shermer. On second thought, it might be inherently impossible to find a truly independent OTC scientist.

Commercial-free MP3 of Air America 9/11 Truth Debate

Please let me know if I accidentally cut out any of the debate.

http://media.putfile.com/Commerical-Free-Thom-Hartman-911-Truth-Debate-K...

EDIT: Oops! Missed the entire third hour but it's covered elsewhere. Sorry!

Someone please post the rest!

Thanks for posting the first part. Can someone post the remainder?

Thanks

...to those of you who are supportive.

The debate was very short, and required cutting out a great deal of information. But we got some good stuff out there.

Remember, spazzing out about "CD only" isn’t necessarily the best approach with everyone. And you can take that from someone who has delivered the demolition hypothesis effectively to many people over a period of years now.

Who is al Qaeda?

Great job, Kevin

You are one of the best and most credible 9/11 spokespersons out there. Keep up the great work!

Thank you for your dedication

I would like to show my appreciation for your efforts. We all may differ on style and the various points but your courage in facing this issue from the begining is EXEMPLARY.

Would like to let you know you have many friends and supporters from Asia.

Many people here are aware of the truth.

Pls keep up the good work and best wishes.

An important video

Impeachment is on the table

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yJYbgouqlMw

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The CONSTITUTION is NOT going to "collapse" into pulverized dust no matter how much thermate/explosives or planes they throw at it

High Road

Nice job Kevin. I wonder what makes people like Michael Shermer tick. He's a former fundamentalist Christian, now hosting a show on the Fox Family Channel. I think he's a mole.

Thank you Kevin

I think this was one of the best performances our movement has made, to date.

Shermer came across as a dabbler, not very knowledgeable, and obsessed with poo pooing the very idea -- COMPLETELY AT ODDS WITH HIS ROLE AS "SKEPTIC."

Kevin was cool, held his composure and did not rely on bogus info or any one line of argumentation. This was a highly refreshing contrast to the movement images of late: being dragged out of auditoriums yelling about being tazered.

I think numerous people are going to be interested to look deeper. And thanks to Thom Hartman for bringing up the Kennedy assassination too. Completely a 180 from Gnome Chomsky.

From the initial posts here, I thought we were in trouble. Not so. Kevin set the standard for a lucid and honest appraisal and debate for a mainstream uninformed audience.

Fuckin A.

I Concur. Kevin Did a Fine Job

After hearing a portion of the audio that alexjonesfan posted, I think Kevin did a fine job and with great composure.

Remember that Shermer is a master of tactics and very adept at this format. Kevin was professional and credible and did mention Mineta after all, as well as doing a good job with Building 7. There really isn't enough time to hit everything, esp. when you're responding to the moderator and trying to clear up misconceptions and straw men. Overall, I think it was very good and will lead many to research Kevin Ryan and the Journal where they will encounter lots more information.

As a philosophy guy myself, I was entertained by Shermer's reference to Occam's razor, whereby the simplest explanation tends to be the best one. And the simplest explanation regarding 9/11 is that it was an Inside Job.

Thanks Kevin

I liked your approach.

A contrast would be someone like Alex Jones. He is quick on his feet and has all the answers. But let's face it he turns off many people and sounds a little crazy. It is difficult to be objective knowing so much about 911 truth.

One thing I wish you would have hit him with was when he mentioned that the Vietnam War was not the result of a conspiracy. If you would have popped out with "how about the Gulf of Tonkin".

I thought Shermer did poorly but hey that's just me. Also it appeared to me that Hartman was with you!

I vote victory!!

Alex Jones has all the

Alex Jones has all the answers?

I want some of whatever you're smoking.

One nice point was when Shermer was questioned about the wire transfer, ISI, Ahmad, Atta, etc.. and he goes "Well this isn't the direction I thought we were going to go..."

He really didn't have an answer other than "sometimes we hire the bad guys"

on 2nd listen it wasn't as bad as I originally thought. I guess I was mad because I knew where I'd go with the conversation, but then again, I wasn't the one on the radio and under the pressure of performing.

/////////////////////
911dvds@gmail.com - $1 DVDs shipped - email for info

My preference

is for exposing inconsistencies in the official story and focusing on the shoddy investigation, imcompetence, then leading into LIHOP with with minimal focus on MIHOP(including controlled demo).
More like a David Griffen approach.

DHS - I didn't mean Alex Jones literally has all the answers...I meant he comes off that way in public.
Overally confident even fanatical in contrast to Kevin's approach today.

Personally I like it when people say "I don't know" instead of breathlessly repeating a hundred 911 talking points or speculating wildly about the perps.

However more and more I fear we are heading toward the conspiracy theory graveyard...

With all due respect

to Kevin Ryan, he did a very poor job in that debate. He's clearly not one of our best communicators, and in the future we should think more about the type of personality we're putting into the spotlight. Someone quick like Sander Hicks, or someone deadly like David Ray Griffin would be preferable. Kevin really didn't address many of the standard counter arguments made by Shermer, such as the incompetence argument, the someone would have leaked argument, etc... Those are essential points to address, otherwise your opponenet will keep bringing them up, which is exactly what happened. Furthermore, as Abby mentioned, why for the love of god did Kevin steer completely around the massive body of forensic and physical evidence that supports our side? I mean he even let Shermer get away with saying that there was no indication of demolition, which is INEXCUSABLE. How could he not mention the molten metal? And while he did touch on free fall collapse, it's important to explain to people the significance of that speed, ie, how it violates the laws of physics, as opposed to just mentioning it. Gah! Like I said, very disappointing. The same criticisms can be applied to his discussion of the NORAD stand-down, where although he mentioned some decent points, he failed to communicate the comprehensiveness of the arguments against the official story, not to mention it's various contradictions. And what about the victim's families? Gah! Ryan did not present his arguments with any conviction, and worse, he kept shrouding our strong evidence in uncertainty.. Hartmann even had to step in and help him a few times, which is unacceptable. These opportunities to reach the masses are so important; we need to jump on them with our best people and our best arguments. Not like this.

Very disappointing.

:P

agreed

"I will not withdraw from this war even if Laura and Barney are the only ones supporting me." -George W. Bush

Disagree

I thought Kevin sounded great. He sounded informed and "normal". There is too much ranting and raving in this movement. This was a good intro for the Air America crowd. Abby got out a lot of good info in her call but sounded a bit desperate and unhinged. My hat is off to Kevin.

?

i thought this blog was about critiquing the debate, not my phone call.

"I will not withdraw from this war even if Laura and Barney are the only ones supporting me." -George W. Bush

but

your phone call became part of the debate. I am on your side Abby, I thought Kevin was being treated a bit unfairly. Sorry to offend.

disagree too

>>he did a very poor job in that debate.

I think the thing we have to remember is how many people on here were cheering for Jim Fetzer -- bluster and little else, and anyone following up on him was directed to utter nonsense. People will have opinions on 911blogger who are watching the cable channels 24/7 and are not satisfied if they don't have a person screaming at O'Reilly.

Kevin was very powerful and commanding and -- rare for anyone making it into mainstream media of any kind -- has the facts at his command. He returned the debate to his court repeatedly in presenting the two hypotheses. He followed a theme and he kept the debate on track.

Shermer was caught off guard repeatedly and continually tried to bring it back to minutae of the demolitions which he ultimately could not defend. Kevin had the whole story, the larger story, and he sunk Shermer with the larger body of points he made.

My unwanted or asked for critique

I finally listened to the full "debate". My thoughts.

1) Shermer: "Al Qaeda said they did it"

"Water boarded KSM and debunked or inadmissible tapes of Bin Laden which has been refuted by experts and not given status of "evidence"? And Shermer references 1993. Care to speak about the FBI knowledge in that one Shermer? Dismissed. Thwarted attempts at LAX? TSA employess there are old friends of mine, they can't pronounce "Al Qadea". A lead TSA chief got drunk one night and handed me his wallet by accident.

Response:Kevin stays calm and stays on point noting that these are working "hypotheses". On point.

2) Shermer goes on a mini ramble about the psychological make-up of "conspiracists".

Is that a hypothesis Shermer? Or are we writing a sociology paper? Is this a debate or your straw man pulpit of personal feeling about us?

3)Shermer claims thousands of operatives would have to be involved? How so Shermer? Is this a hypothesis.. or supported by negative data?

4)Shermer claims "nobody would have spilled the beans by now"?

Are you saying nobody has Michael, or attempted to? Break out the lists on this one. Sorry Mikey...no go on the spin job.

5)Shermer claims President's "spill the beans" when they leave office.

Weird. That's why files are sealed under Executive Privelege for years and there are actually Bi Laws in which the President CAN'T know everything with respect to separation of powers within the Intel community. Is Shermer's Polyannish view of the world even healthy at this point?

Kevin Ryan response: "I believe the truth is simple but not obvious". Awesome. Kevin transitioned into the Saudi, ISI, KSM connection. Could have gone deeper, gave LIHOP a nod on that one, but it was safe and objective.

Kevin got into some soft factoids about mid way. Haven't heard hard data yet, but this format is too rushed.

Shermer parrots the "So the Bush Administration did it" line. That's why the "Bush did it" crap is a noose.

6) Michael gets into the "Hindsight Bias" and brings the Pearl Harbor straw man, of post reaction. Very weak and it's getting boring after hearing him parrot this multiple times.

Kevins responses are calm and honest and reminds people that this is a hypothesis. I liked it. But then he goes directly into the speculative about the "psychological operation". Still doesn't address the reason or the question.

7) Shermer claims the buildings collapsed right where they were hit. Kevin responds with the core breech scenario. Shermer responds with more giggles and vague "logic" and wide speculation. Kevin comes back with another hypothesis and speculation. They're both playing the speculation game.

8)Shermer states that Building 7 collapses where it was injured. Kevin called him on his BS. There is NO photographic evidence supporting this. And yes, the Building fell down MORE symmetrically than a generic demolition. Shermer goes to another straw man, the highway bridge that collapsed. Kevin appropriately giggles, as we all should.

9) Kevin gets into the airspace reasoning. Not enough time to go deeper into it. that issue is a slippery slope anyways.

Pause for break.....

Back from break and Shermer is mumbling about nonsensical stuff.

Mentioning of the insiders with foreknowledge or warnings by Kevin Ryan. Would have liked to hear about Indira Singh and her contacts. At this point the host starts talking to much. Kevin tries to bring it on topic again. Shermer comes back with yet ANOTHER straw man about a "boat". Shermer comes back with "They said they did it, this is a waste of energy and too far out there. We should be focusing on the real stuff blah blah blah.

This wasn't a good debate regardless, but Kevin "won" if there is such a thing with a debate format like this. Shermer said absolutely NOTHING. He didn't even need to show up IMO.
Kevin tried to stay on topic as much as he could with the little time. He has the patience of a saint too.

Conclusion: I would have liked to seen Shermer get drilled but Kevin is not the type. Kevin is calm and professional while Shermer is .....well.....I can't describe it. Michael has been tapped with kid gloves, by way of debate, format for a while now though. Taped debates on camera in a formal setting are much better obviously. Hope to see better in the future, and that's no reflection on Mr. Ryan, just the format. The so called skeptics have basically worn their mottos and buzzwords thin...just like a few on this side of the aisle. We need to ramp it up folks, with new information coming out weekly there is no excuse to rely on "2004" factoids(not saying that's what Kevin did just a reminder). I honestly don't see how these guardians of "critical thinking" ever got into the spotlight or given the slightest ear sometimes. Nature of the beast I guess.

Personal note: I'd like to ask Mr. Shermer (which I bet is lurking around somewhere or will be)..what does he call someone who is skeptical of the skeptics?

*wink*

Ok I'm done rambling. I needed to vent for the most part, so excuse me. I could just sum the whole thing up with.....HUH???WTF LOL WTH? OMG MEH and that would be more to the point I guess.

No offense Kevin, but you

No offense Kevin, but you pretty much choked when discussing evidence for CD. I thought Abby, the caller, did an awesome job. You really should have your talking points written down in order to be better prepared. Thanks for trying though.

CD

>>you pretty much choked when discussing evidence for CD

How so? I didn't think so at all. I think he did great.

One problem I think people get into on here is that they have a set series of responses they want to hear and then reject anything that isn't those.

The reality is that average listeners on Hartmann's show likely will do just fine with Kevin's CD points and Kevin spoke to the larger story of the day which will especially resonate with those listeners, probably more so than people on here, who are focused on one area that resonates for them (CD).

That's what happens on the internet where we can choose our preferred reality and link round and round to it -- we often don't have a sense of the viewpoints of average people. Most average people respond to a variety of different points. Kevin responded to the breadth of that and so likely was connecting to a lot of different types of people. And his points on CD were excellent.

so, I ask again, is there a link for the whole show somewhere?

I can only get 49% from the link provided. The mirror doesnt work at all.
If anyone who has a copy could put it up on YouSendIt and post a link it would be nice.
Thanks
C

Most of the important things in the world have been accomplished by people who have kept on trying when there seemed to be no hope at all.
- Dale Carnegie