j_b

I wish, but it appears manyy forgot everything before and including the Wikileaks releases. Multitasking brats with the attention span and the memory of a goldfish.

bump!

More evasive bullshit from you. You are a total disgrace!

Now if either of you can quote me citing Occamn's Razor I'm ready. If you cut and paste anything I wrote then you don't undersand the nuances of the concept. ? dude, you aren't making any sense whatsoever. Citing me, then claiming there is something wrong with what I said without ever saying what is wrong isn't going to work.

...which more than insuates that there is some complex problem to be solved that skeptical reivew will unveil. the official version changed considerably and inexplicably within ~4 days and no direct evidence was provided. Skepticism was the proper course of action. Ignoring the mountain of evidence to the effect the public is manipulated for warmongering and the inexplicable backtracking on the version of events isn't an application of Occam's razor, it's blatant jingoism. false. The probability the pentagon is lying to us about OBL and Afghanistan is significant, and Chomsky cites the FBI director about the lack of evidence that would stand in a court of law. Whether some other Bush admin agency thinks differently doesn't change any of it, especially considering Bush's record. logic and Occam's razor should tell you that no body means no direct evidence, and that someone unarmed shot twice in the head was most likely executed. how are the readings of wikipedia going? making progress?

I know I am naive to believe that Jim has any intellectual honesty left in these "debates".

Do I really need to explain this? OK then. You stated this You are cheating. You brought up Occam's razor to debunk OBL having been executed, not my post of last week.

here comes the mud slinger. What a goon!

well, i was gonna say "leap of faith", which it was. true enough because the simplest explanation, considering how little we know, is that he was executed.

That must why you have been regurgitating all the smears and ad-hominem attacks by KKK. Your demonizing rhetoric doesn't pass the bullshit test.

so what's your argument again about Occam's razor in this instance?

it is not a leap in logic, it's a wrong application of Occam's.

note the total absence of any argument addressing the matter at hand from the service goon. Didn't you guys know that i broadcast nationwide and have an army of editors and proof-readers to make sure there is no typos or misspoken words?

Actually no, logic says the simplest explanation is the likely closest to the truth unless other evidence is laid out - or if you rather - the law of parismony, or an extrapolation upon Aristotle - if you want to get esoteric about it. Freshman logic class - really. Occam's razor is not only a very blunt instrument but in this case it suggests OBL was executed. knowing the existence of a concept is one thing, knowing how to apply it is even better, but clearly beyond the scope of freshman's logic class as Jim just demonstrated.

Occam's razor suggests that people like KKK don't want a discussion to occur. Attacking people personally as he does systematically is a true and tried method of turning any discussion into a mud fight. Neofascists use that method a lot to demonize their opponents.

Obama was executed? Holy Shit! You are a moron. right, someone obviously misspeaking is a moron LOLZ what a fucking retard

"derp" "conspiracy theorists" "kill him twice" "deather" "birther" etc ...

Actually no, logic says the simplest explanation is the likely closest to the truth unless other evidence is laid out - or if you rather - the law of parismony, or an extrapolation upon Aristotle - if you want to get esoteric about it. Freshman logic class - really. Occam's razor is not only a very blunt instrument but in this case it suggests OBL was executed.

the evidence "presented" says he was unarmed and shot twice in the head. Are you denying that?

logic says the perfect crime is to make the body disappear, as everyone knows but rob apparently.

They also claim it would have been a nightmare in every way to have him dead and in their possession

When we tell you governments lie, you ask if bears shit in the woods. When we tell you this looks very muck like a lie, you scream "conspiracy". Pathetic.

The overall point is that there is a lot that we don't know and some of us definitely know little and shouldn't be spouting demonizing bullshit about conspiracy theorists and OBL lovers or whatnot.

There is classified evidence ... but, there is quite a bit of circumstantial evidence. The point is that OBL was likely guilty but there weren't enough direct evidence to convict him in a court of law (as indicated by the FBI director in 02), which is what Chomsky was saying despite the twerps pretending he implied OBL didn't do it.

There is classified evidence ...