Letters From The "other Side" Options

[Leslie Landry]

http://www.nizkor.org/features/fallacies/h...ralization.html

Also Known as: Fallacy of Insufficient Statistics, Fallacy of Insufficient Sample, Leaping to A Conclusion, Hasty Induction.
Description of Hasty Generalization

This fallacy is committed when a person draws a conclusion about a population based on a sample that is not large enough. It has the following form:

1. Sample S, which is too small, is taken from population P.
2. Conclusion C is drawn about Population P based on S.

The person committing the fallacy is misusing the following type of reasoning, which is known variously as Inductive Generalization, Generalization, and Statistical Generalization:

1. X% of all observed A's are B''s.
2. Therefore X% of all A's are Bs.

The fallacy is committed when not enough A's are observed to warrant the conclusion. If enough A's are observed then the reasoning is not fallacious.

that was a little confusing but i get it lol. I wrote this man alot of facts. it was a huge email and he never got back to me. thats what these people do tho. they go on forums and say what they think they know because thats what tv told them...and when you go to prove them wrong..they crawl into a corner and shut up.

[Sanders]

...I like how he brings up Gary Bauer, PNAC manifesto signator. Dude one day signs a manifesto calling for a "cataclysmic" and "catalyzing" event "like a New Pearl Harbor"

There is no statement in the PNAC which calls for such an event.

Well, it doesn't exactly "call" for such an event, but, considering that this was their wish list and they got their "catalyzing event" you seem to be splitting hairs, semantically speaking ...

"...the process of transformation, even if it brings revolutionary change, is likely to be a long one, absent some catastrophic and catalyzing event – like a new Pearl Harbor."

'Rebuilding America’s Defenses — Strategy, Forces, and Resources for a New Century', page 51
Project for the New American Century, September 2000


..............................

...It wasn't a scientist or an expert witness it was a controversial French auther named Thierry Meyssan. He made the original claim of that it couldn't have been flight 77 that hit the pentagon because the hole didn't match the wingspan. What he didn't say was that the 12ft hole came from the landing gear and the larger hole that came from the fuselage was 75ft because one wing hit the ground and the other was sheared off on impact. He also ignored the fact that hundreds of eyewitnesses saw the plane and DNA evidence matching the passangers was recovered at the crash site...

(IMG:http://pilotsfor911truth.org/forum/style_emoticons/default/whistle.gif)

Not a single eyewitness said they saw the plane hit the building (not to mention the other problems with the accounts). There is no chain of custody to show that the DNA came from the Pentagon. And what's this business about a larger 75ft. hole?? This guy is just making stuff up.

[elmersglue]

"There is no statement in the PNAC which calls for such an event."


Well, it doesn't exactly "call" for such an event

Precisely.

[maturin42]

Precisely.

Gee, I wish we could all have some ice cream. I really like ice cream and I could have some too, if only Dad would wake up from his nap, he could drive us all down to the Dairy Queen. But Dad is tired, and is taking a nap and I know it would be wrong to wake him from his nap. If someone wanted to wake him, dropping some pans from the kitchen would do the trick if it were done close to the couch where he is sleeping. I guess someone could stack some of them up next to the couch, then call the dog, and he might bump into them - causing an awful clatter. It would be a terrible thing to do but...

Hmmm...

[Sanders]

Gee, I wish we could all have some ice cream. I really like ice cream and I could have some too, if only Dad would wake up from his nap, he could drive us all down to the Dairy Queen. But Dad is tired, and is taking a nap and I know it would be wrong to wake him from his nap. If someone wanted to wake him, dropping some pans from the kitchen would do the trick if it were done close to the couch where he is sleeping. I guess someone could stack some of them up next to the couch, then call the dog, and he might bump into them - causing an awful clatter. It would be a terrible thing to do but...

(IMG:http://pilotsfor911truth.org/forum/style_emoticons/default/laughing1.gif)



To steal a phrase, precisely.



(...here, fido!!!)

[ogrady]

It's such a waste of time to argue with OCT defenders. 911 was above all a media hoax. I love it when they quote as PROOF something that someone wrote in the paper "The DNA at the Pentagon was recovered by a tireless team of independent researchers.....blah, blah, blah." Because of the overwhelming trust placed in the media and the media's reliance on 'official sources' this is a huge obstacle to overcome.

Have factions in the government participated in a conspiracy? For the straight dope, let's ask the government!

[bill]

Here is the PNAC quote from "Rebuilding America's Defenses: Strategy, Forces and Resources for the New American Century"

"the process of transformation, even if it brings revolutionary change, is likely to be a long one, absent some catastrophic and catalyzing event – like a new Pearl Harbor."

the PNAC site btw has been taken down

I think they were getting too much heat

I think you are playing semantics, elmer (IMG:http://pilotsfor911truth.org/forum/style_emoticons/default/thumbdown.gif)

[dMz]

the PNAC site btw has been taken down

I think they were getting too much heat

I don't think that they've been getting enough heat, Bill. (IMG:http://pilotsfor911truth.org/forum/style_emoticons/default/wink.gif)

What have they re-named themselves these days? American Enterprise Institute for Public Policy Research , or something like that.

[Leslie Landry]

It's such a waste of time to argue with OCT defenders.

frankly..i dont think it is. and i dont argue with them. I give them information that they obviously havent looked into. i simply want to make people aware who are oblivious to what really happend and to make them think..."oh..maybe they are right? maybe the government's story really doesnt add up? i think i might just look into this further."

Trying to open peoples eyes up to the truth is important. wouldnt you agree?

[bill]

the PNAC site btw has been taken down

I think they were getting too much heat

I don't think that they've been getting enough heat, Bill. (IMG:http://pilotsfor911truth.org/forum/style_emoticons/default/wink.gif)


Oh I quite agree they hqaven't gotten nearly enough 'heat' IMO, but then I think they need to be fried up in old sparky.

I think they were getting too much heat in their opinion

What have they re-named themselves these days? American Enterprise Institute for Public Policy Research , or something like that.

Not sure what they call themselves these days but they are still there running around like the little cockroaches

[Sanders]

All the same people are active, at the American Enterprise Institute, Hoover Institution, Henry Jackson Society, etc.

[elmersglue]

Here is the PNAC quote from "Rebuilding America's Defenses: Strategy, Forces and Resources for the New American Century"

"the process of transformation, even if it brings revolutionary change, is likely to be a long one, absent some catastrophic and catalyzing event – like a new Pearl Harbor."

I think you are playing semantics, elmer (IMG:http://pilotsfor911truth.org/forum/style_emoticons/default/thumbdown.gif)

No semantics here, brother. Nothing in that statement suggested a need or desire for some catastrophic or catalyzing event, they're just talking about how an event like that would affect the timetable.

[bill]

See maturin's post above, elmer

seriously, you should read the whole document to get the thrust of what PNAC was advocating

[Wibble]

Any pilots on here may have heard of this company:

http://www.kenyoninternational.com/

I have had some training off these guys and they talked about the DNA collection from 9/11. Of course they could be lying but innocent until proven guilty is the way things are done in civilised society. If the DNA evidence is faked, or a hoax then these guys will be in on it. Has anyone asked them about it?

What is this mystical anti-aircraft defence system at the Pentagon and why would it have one? Please keep any answers in the real world.

[Omega892R09]

Here is the PNAC quote from "Rebuilding America's Defenses: Strategy, Forces and Resources for the New American Century"

"the process of transformation, even if it brings revolutionary change, is likely to be a long one, absent some catastrophic and catalyzing event – like a new Pearl Harbor."

the PNAC site btw has been taken down

I think they were getting too much heat

I think you are playing semantics, elmer (IMG:http://pilotsfor911truth.org/forum/style_emoticons/default/thumbdown.gif)

I have copies saved here as an 853KB PDF if anybody wants a copy - shout.

I have just copied this quote from page 51:

Further, the process of transformation, even if it brings revolutionary change, is likely to be a long one, absent some catastrophic and catalyzing event – like a new Pearl Harbor.

[Sanders]

Any pilots on here may have heard of this company:

http://www.kenyoninternational.com/

I have had some training off these guys and they talked about the DNA collection from 9/11. Of course they could be lying but innocent until proven guilty is the way things are done in civilised society. If the DNA evidence is faked, or a hoax then these guys will be in on it. Has anyone asked them about it?

What is this mystical anti-aircraft defence system at the Pentagon and why would it have one? Please keep any answers in the real world.

Were they the people who collected the DNA evidence that was used to identify the passengers from flight AA77 and delivered it to the Armed Forces Institute of Pathology? If not, I don't see how they had to be "in on" anything ... there were plenty of real people who really died both in the Towers and at the Pentagon.

[Wibble]

Sorry, please define which real people did not die? What real people did die? What fake people died and so on?

[JFK]

Sorry, please define which real people did not die? What real people did die? What fake people died and so on?

http://www.nizkor.org/features/fallacies/straw-man.html

[Sanders]

Sorry, please define which real people did not die? What real people did die? What fake people died and so on?

Huh??? The crux of my last post was not IF certain people died but WHERE certain people died. You might wanna read it again.


The "real people who really died both in the Towers and at the Pentagon" who I attempted to refer to would obviously be those who were in the Pentagon and the WTC, as opposed to the people who were allegedly on the planes.

[Wibble]

as opposed to the people who were allegedly on the planes

You cant have it both ways sonny. If the DNA evidence can proof who the people in the buildings died where it can prove who the people in the planes where who died to. Picking and choosing when the DNA is accurate or not is just mad.