9/11 Free Fall 7/18/13: Dr. deHaven-Smith and "conspiracy theory"

[William Seger]

5. Your compulsion to respond to every post

... even when you apparently don't have a cogent point is making you look silly.

I have changed no "spec," and you are apparently the one with a reading comprehension problem. Maybe reading it again will help. I said:

For example, I've never seen the "conspiracy theorist" label applied to anyone for simply "questioning the official account of events." No, the definition of "conspiracy theorist" -- as derived from their own behavior, not a CIA plot -- is someone who asserts highly implausible and speculative conspiracy theories as absolute facts, for what prove to be unsubstantiated and highly dubious reasons

The post that you say "wasn't {my} claim" is simply a shorter restatement:

Conspiracy theorists don't "QUESTION" the official account because they have a religious belief that they already know the "answers."

If you think that's "chang{ing} the spec" then I have to conclude that you simply don't understand what I'm saying, which is not my problem.

> The reasonable questions of the 9/11 skeptics have not been answered.

Sez you, a conspiracy theorist, after giving example after example on this board of exactly what I'm talking about. Thanks for proving my point.