I drive people nuts!

wahlers
Berichten: 368
Lid geworden op: Vr Nov 17, 2006 8:27 pm

I drive people nuts!

Berichtdoor wahlers » Vr Mei 02, 2008 11:49 pm

Een engelse titel in de Zoo...en totaal niet gerelateerd aan de Islam of enige andere godsdienst.

Maar wel gerelateerd aan een niet onderbouwde overtuiging.

Waar gaat het over?

Ik had gereageerd -- meerdere malen zelfs! -- op een nogal schandalig youtube filmpje over de 9/11 aanslag.
Hier is de referentie: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BoJJIYWMZlY

Nb. De eerste 40 seconden, Bill Maher, zijn volkomen zinnig en rationeel.
Het gaat om de daarop volgende reactie.

Wat is nu het geval?

Meerdere malen zijn mijn reacties simpelweg verwijderd.
Reacties waar ik met argumenten kwam en om verfieerbare argumenten vroeg.
Uiteindelijk stuurde iemand mij een "private mail".
Hieronder volgt de conversatie en het "hellevuur" wat deze dame tegen mij spuwde!
Ik heb de twijfelachtige eer om mensen in het harnas te jagen!
Vandaar de (engelstalige) titel: I drive people nuts!

Hieronder volgt de reply uitwisseling in chronologische volgorde van actie/reactie, volgende actie/reactie, enz...

Mairinohailche schreef:why on earth would I need you to explain anything?
there you go again on your self adoration trip.
What makes you think your the expert and why do you consider yourself above everyone?
I can access experts on this why would i ask you for an opinion....
what I want are FACTS, not YOUR OPINION.
you obviously DIDN'T READ all that I wrote just as you didnt read my profile
to discover I was female before accusing me of being a wife beater.
The reason why you didnt is because you think you know it all.
well im sorry but YOU DONT
Wim Ahlers schreef:Mairinohailche,

That is all I want to show you: The FACTS in DETAIL.
That is all.

And yes! I know some facts in detail.
And no! I am not an expert in explosives, construction, air planes, et al.
Nobody is! Nobody can be. An expert, by definition, is only an expert on a specific subject.
Conclusively: We are all equally non-experts in one thing or the other.
But I can show you why, how and where the accusations
- in regard to 9/11 any accusation for that matter! -
is inconsistent with the observable facts.

Just accept my invitation to discuss these details on a forum to your likings.
I am willing to discuss each and every accusation.
And no! I will refrain myself of venting my opinion. Indeed!
I agee that is exactly what we should not do. We must stay factual.

I am sorry that I was not clear on the message:
"When did you stop beating your wife?"

This expression has actually nothing to do with wife beating
but is a commonly known expression used in the USA to emphasize
that a question is being formulated containing an unverified baised presupposition.
See also: http://www.fallacyfiles.org/loadques.html

I used this phrase/formulation because it is remarks such as:
"You belief anything the government is telling you! Don't you?"
(I ignore the fact for the moment that the statement itself is irrelevant,
since I am not a US citizen!)

But you are correct about one thing!
I indeed did not know that you are a women (I do now!).
Nor do I consider it important or relevant to any 9/11 accusation or conspiracy plot.
Just for your information: I am male, 45, Dutch. And yes, my name truly is: Wim Ahlers.
I have been a highschool teacher in mathematics and physics.
I have some hand-on experience with explosives when I was in the army and serving time in Egypt
(MFO. Reference: http://www.mfo.org/2/homepage.asp)


Regards, Wim Ahlers.




Mairinohailche schreef:you also see my questions as accusations... I seriously think you have a complex.
Dont you think its strange, I wrote about 8 posts saying a lot of FACTS but nobody from your group commented at all. (except name calling)
Dont you think its strange that you claim to know it all.
Dont you think its strange you tell me I can ask qiuestions but then riducule and bully people who do.
Dont you think its strange that YOU and your friends think I should ask YOU questions when I can ask real experts.

You people have real problems.
Wim Ahlers schreef:You misunderstood me.
Asking questions is good!
But I have a scientifical background.
And with my background a question is without a conclusion.
A question must be answerable.
Asking unanswerable questions is pointless.

Furthermore: Also facts are observable and measurtable entities.
Something that cannot be measured or observed is at its best an inference.
However, more often then not - in relation to the 9/11 conspiracy theorists - it is an accusation,
or worse, presented as a conclusion.

Lastly, I can only repeat what I have said before.
Discussion should be on a honest medium.
And youtube is not an honest medium.
It is for venting opinions and not a honest discussion area.
I can only repeat my request to discuss each and every detail on a suitable medium, like a forum.
On a forum only the moderator can remove text that does not confirm
to the rules (which is rarely done).
On youtube you can just simply vote away any answer you don't like.
Not to mention the restriction of 500 characters!

Lastly, experts do not tell the truth.
As a matter of fact, expert hardly ever vent their opinion.
Expert collect en organise facts in a coherent framework
and present this for peer review to the relevant scientific community.

In other words, though the 'opinion' of an expert is of higher value than a layman's 'opinion',
it by no means is synonymous for the 'truth'.
For a certain guarantee of truth you need an unbaised and anonymous scientific peer review.

I am willing to discuss all these matters on a forum to your likings.


Regards, Wim Ahlers.




Mairinohailche schreef:1) you attacked me solely on my opinion.
The hogwash excuse you make is just that.
There is no excuse and an apology would have been correct.
2)

"That is all I want to show you: The FACTS in DETAIL.
That is all."
you still insist YOU have the facts... why?
who is to say your facts are any truer than anyone elses?
3) Like I said before.... if people doubt the officvial story its the governments duty to explain.
If you people believe thats fine, but I dont see why you are so agressive and insult anyone who differs.
3) I give up on sheeple and shall continue my research with the army of REAL experts out there.
I dont need name calling morons who are afraid to pull their sorry heads out of the sand.

Thanks for the answer as it seems I cant post on the site.
DONT write to me agin I dont think you are qualified and you are too offensive.
Wim Ahlers schreef:When and where did I ever offend you?
When and where did I ever do any name calling?

And yes! I do know some facts you don't know.
And yes! I do know the sources that can answer most, if not all, your questions.

Again, let's discuss these issues in a rational manner on any reliable forum to your likings.

You seem reluctant to do so.
Would you prefer to present to me one, and just one question, to start with that according to you deserves an answer?
Nb. in relation to the 9/11 accusations of course!


Regards, Wim Ahlers.




Mairinohailche schreef:"For a certain guarantee of truth you need an unbaised and anonymous scientific peer review."


EXACTLY..... so you are excluded because
if you were not unbias with your scathing attack on me before you even looked at who I am.
I rest my case.... now do as i suggest and think about your position on this.
I bet you still havent read all the posts I made.
Wim Ahlers schreef:What made you come to the conclusion that I am biased?
So far I have done nothing else, and nothing less,
then trying to invite you to discuss all matters on a discussion forum.

What can be biased about that?

Yes! I did - and do! - say that any and all conspiracy theories are unfounded.
But that is not bias.
That is what I concluded on the basis of all available evidence,
investigations, related inquiries and the logical deduction thereof.

No! I did not provide any details in the youtube answer blocks for two obvious reasons:

1. It is limited to 500 characters.
500 characters of reply is rather meager to formulate a scientifically convincing meaningful reply.
That is, a reply supported with the relevant and trusted scientific references.

2. I noticed that when I did provide some references and answers that these answers were simply deleted
either intentionally or unintentionally.

But I am willing to discuss any detail you propose.
Which is extremely fair!
It is extremely fair because I leave you the opportunity and choice to
present your strongest argument without any restrictions whatsoever.

So, I repeat my two open invitations:
1. Let's discuss the details of anything on a forum to your likings.
2. Or, alternatively, let's (to start with!) discuss one specific detail here in the private message area.

I honestly do not understand what you are so upset about.
And your reluctance to discuss this on an open forum (to your likings!).

On a forum anybody can join and enrich the discussion with new insides
and be corrected on basis of the avialable information
without resulting to such childish behaviour by voting away answers someone does not like as spam
(an option that is used and abused on youtube!).


Regards, Wim Ahlers.




Mairinohailche schreef:you know your saying all conspiracy theories are unfounded:

1) the official theory is a conspiracy theory between bin Laden and Saddam Hussain.
2) your refuting any theory and then say your not bias!
you have formed your opinion and arent open to considering anything else = YOUR BIAS!! or...........STUPID!!
Wim Ahlers schreef:In the strictest sense that might be correct.
But this strictest sense is without context.

Within the context of this discussion, the 9/11 tragedy, the conspirator is the USA government,
or influential industrial leaders with or within the government
and sometimes the media as the propaganda machine controlled or manipulated by the government.

Anyway, when I refer to the 'conspiracy theories' then I mean
the context above.
If you prefer I can use the more precise term:
"The alleged 9/11 government conspiracy".
Or I can simply use the commonly used abbreviation on youtube "CT".
An abbreviation used by: bambino291. And I quote this user:

Lol Mairino, what are you so afraid of?
If you have actual questions than why are you not asking them.
Why don't you actually see if there is answers out there for them.
Are you afraid that I will debunk any claims you make about a CT?


My invitation to discuss the 9/11 details, and all alleged accusations,
on a more serious medium still stands.
Convince me with the details on such a forum!
Youtube is not a handy (or even appropriate) medium for such a discussion.
A forum (any forum to your likings) is more appropriate and suitable.


Regards, Wim Ahlers.




Mairinohailche schreef:
<<< Een publieke youtube reactie!
Deze was verwijderd voordat ik het kon kopiëren.
Hieronder staat wel de bijbehorende reply>>>


Wim Ahlers schreef:Mairinohailche,

I never called you a wife beater!
Let me quote a previous reply of mine literally:
I am sorry that I was not clear on the message:
"When did you stop beating your wife?"

This expression has actually nothing to do with wife beating
but is a commonly known expression used in the USA
to emphasize that a question is being formulated
containing an unverified baised presupposition.
See also: www fallacyfiles.org/loadques.html


Regards, Wim.




Mairinohailche schreef:your dumb ... I dont want to ask you anything!!
YOU HAVE NOTHING TO SAY!!
now quit contacting me your boring.
Wim Ahlers schreef:It seems to me that it is you who are calling names now.
Get a hold of your emotions, take a deep breath, reflect and relax.

Still!
I would like all to hear the verified arguments you claim to have
that supports the alleged accusation(s) that there was, or is, a conspiracy
other than the 19 terrorists who conspired and brought these 4 buildings down
(the twin towers, building 7, and partly(!) the Pentagon).

I am looking forward to see the verifiable evidence that supports such, or likewise, accusation.
You don't have to ask me anything for presenting your detailed evidence
(by means of your own trusted references).
I am just looking forward to respond to them...when granted the opportunity.

Regards, Wim Ahlers.




Mairinohailche schreef:get a hold of MY emotions.... your the one who still hasnt apologised for attacking me
for the sole reason that i dont think the way you do... and thank god i dont.
I will repeat again I wrote about 8 posts and none of you have made a comment.
19 hijackers? how come 6 are still alive? which means the hijackers(?) had false passports..
but then how come those names werent on the passenger list?
and again if thats so and some of the so called jackers are still alive ...
how come the FBI havent modified their list? DONT ANSWER ..
I HAVE NO INTREST IN CONVERSING WITH AN ABUSIVE FANATIC WHO KEEPS WRITING TO A WOMAN WHO DOESNT WANT HIS ATTENTION.
GET A LIFE!!!
Wim Ahlers schreef:But how can you expect an honest conversation if you forbid me to answer any question?

It looks to me that you think that I have attacked you personally(!).
I never did!
However, I do attack your arguments(!). But that is exactly what happens in a peer review.
Exchanging critical and opposite arguments is the feeding ground for science and ultimately the truth.

What have I said to offend you personally?

You are not refering to the wife beating remark -- I hope not!
I did show you, using verifiable evidence (a link), what this expression means.
And it does not mean "wife beating".
As the expression "buying a cat in the sack" does not mean
or imply...well!...bying a cat in the sack!

Therefore I assume I have said something else too that offended you personally.

I would appreciate if you inform me about what I have said that
offended you and of which you feel that I should apologise for.

And yes! I can answer the question about the 13 hijackers!
...if you care to accept verifiable references that I can provide that counter this wild accusation.
Am I allowed to answer?

Finally, your remark of:
"for the sole reason that i dont think the way you do... and thank god i dont."
is irrelevant.

That is, neither mine or your opinion is relevant.
What is relevant is verifiable evidence and to which conclusion this verifiable evidence leads us.
Regardless what we think or feel about it.

I have many verifiable references that leads to the inevitable conclusion
that all conspiray theories
(before you start again: The conspiracies that arose after(!) 9/11) are all balony.

Yes! I do know and have seen many, many, many videos claiming the opposite
and tempting written hypotheses supporting the opposite.
But just some video, street remark or random scientist
claiming such an accusation on one of the news media is worthless without verifiable proof.

Also, any alleged conspiracy must have internal consistency!
That is, you cannot contradict yourself.
Sofar all conspiracy theories (the ones after(!) 9/11/2001!) are logically inconsistent.

I am willing and prepared to discuss each and every detail. Are you?


Regards, Wim Ahlers.




Mairinohailche schreef:Get a hold of your emotions, take a deep breath, reflect and relax.


Your initial insults have tuned to a patronising tone that seems to demonstrate an inbred dislike of women
and inparticular free thinking women. Go flex your ego with the boys... it's safer
Wim Ahlers schreef:No, no! I merely, and deliberately(!), made this remark because
you resorted to the tactics of name calling that you claim to resent so much.

The remarks:
"inbred" and
"Go flex your ego with the boys... it's safer."
is far more personal and equally patronizing.
But I propose we both stop this mode of speech.



Regards, Wim Ahlers.




Mairinohailche schreef:ok wimp kep blaming me .... now STOP CONTACTING ME!!
en
i propose AGAIN that you stob badgering me before I'm forced to block you.
Wim Ahlers schreef:Badgering?

Don't worry by now it is clear to me that in your present state of mind you are unable to exchange arguments.

A pitty!

I had hoped to finally be confronted with some serious arguments.
So far I have seen none.

Since you are not willing to discuss the subject on a suitable forum
of your own choosing I propose we end this conversation.
Just one last remark...

Don't forget it was you who made a lot of accusing and personal assumptions, not me.
To refresh your memory, you started with:

why on earth would I need you to explain anything?
there you go again on your self adoration trip.
What makes you think your the expert and why do you consider yourself above everyone?
I can access experts on this why would i ask you for an opinion....
what I want are FACTS, not YOUR OPINION.
you obviously DIDN'T READ all that I wrote just as you didnt read my profile
to discover I was female before accusing me of being a wife beater.
The reason why you didnt is because you think you know it all.
well im sorry but YOU DONT


Again, all I ever wanted was an honest exchange of arguments.


Regards, Wim Ahlers.


Misschien zie ik het verkeerd, maar...het is ongeloofelijk hoe verblindend een geloof kan zijn. Elk geloof! Of dit nu Islam is of het geloof in een absurde samenzweringstheorie.
Nb. Ik heb wel argumenten aangevoerd op de publieke youtube reacties maar deze reacties werden steevast verwijderd door fanatieke volgelingen van de complottheoristen.

Los daarvan, om de één of andere reden dreef ik haar 'nuts'!
Overigens heb ik haar nooit beledigd...tenzij je het onderuit halen van flutargumenten beschouwd als beledigen.


MvG, Wim Ahlers.
Only two things are infinite: the universe and human stupidity;
and I'm not certain about the universe. (Albert Einstein, 1879-1955)

Gebruikersavatar
SDX
Berichten: 1818
Lid geworden op: Ma Feb 04, 2008 3:37 am
Locatie: Thuis

Berichtdoor SDX » Za Mei 03, 2008 12:40 am

Ach Wim, ik heb zelfs doodsbedreigingen gehad op mn YouTube account :roll: ...staan er nog steeds op en ik verwijder ze niet, kan iedereen zien hoe *vredelievend* sommige leden van het clubje van de *vrede* zijn. :smile:
"Joew hef toe tôk toe mie wiz RIESPEK, aaj em moesliem en aaj em bedder den joew!" [Some average muslim]

Gebruikersavatar
Ariel
Berichten: 72582
Lid geworden op: Wo Apr 07, 2004 10:30 pm

Berichtdoor Ariel » Za Mei 03, 2008 12:57 am

Wat een dom mens Wim. Ik kan me niet voorstellen dat er nog steeds mensen bestaan die denken dat de regering of Israel achter de aanslag zaten.
De geest van de wijze richt zich naar rechts, maar de geest van de dwaas naar links.

Gebruikersavatar
migrantenjong
Berichten: 1064
Lid geworden op: Za Nov 24, 2007 4:58 pm
Locatie: Antwerpen/Gent Ideologie: Stokslagen en waterkanonnen

Berichtdoor migrantenjong » Wo Mei 07, 2008 9:12 pm

Weer een argument tegen het algemeen stemrecht.
Now watch what you say, or they'll be calling you a radical, a liberal, oh fanatical, criminal.

wahlers
Berichten: 368
Lid geworden op: Vr Nov 17, 2006 8:27 pm

Berichtdoor wahlers » Wo Mei 07, 2008 10:42 pm

...ach, ieder zijn stem, ieder zijn recht...ook al kraaien sommigen onzin uit :wink:
Only two things are infinite: the universe and human stupidity;

and I'm not certain about the universe. (Albert Einstein, 1879-1955)


Terug naar “Zoo”

Wie is er online

Gebruikers op dit forum: Geen geregistreerde gebruikers en 3 gasten