On 12/12/06, Parker Peters onmywayoutster@gmail.com wrote:
On 12/12/06, geni geniice@gmail.com wrote:
On 12/12/06, George Herbert george.herbert@gmail.com wrote:
On 12/12/06, geni geniice@gmail.com wrote:
[[Scholars for 9/11 Truth]] is a significant indication of the
problem.
What is wrong with that page?
No idea I haven't read it isn't relvivant to my point. My point out there is that there are CTs produceing a large amount of citable material. Most the the active oponents (such as the author of "screw loose change") who are the ones who acutaly write down the point by point debunkings tend not to produce the same amount of citable material.
For any reasonable individual, it only takes one good thorough debunking to show what kooks these nuts are.
The fact that 5 tinfoil hats, even 5 tinfoil hats with cheap university degrees and too little psychological evaluation, spend all day writing about this still doesn't mean we should give them any credence.
No credence, perhaps, but space on Wikipedia? Sure.