'9/11 Truth Movement' and Academia

[Dillinger4]

So I have just finished a dissertation tutorial, on Methodology for my dissertation. This involved me working in a group with other people, so we went round discussing our research topics.

One guy starts telling me how he is writing his Dissertation on the 9/11 Truth movement, and starts telling me that there is a conspiracy, they pulled down tower seven, etc etc. I have heard it all before from here.

It escalates, with me losing my temper and calling him a fucking nutjob, in front of the rest of the class, quite aggressively. Only because he was talking complete and utter shit.

I don't understand how he can possibly carry out research on a subject that is not even based on fact.

This person obviously has a dissertation tutor. And he has met his dissertation tutor, who must have agreed that this is a subject that needs further research. I am just glad that he can only fail on this particular subject.

I just don't understand at all. I probably shouldn't even post this thread, as it will only end up summoning more nut jobs. But I find this so incomprehensible.

Its one thing making things up on the internet. But there are patently no facts for him to base anything on, which I pointed out to him.

 

[Donna Ferentes]

It escalates, with me losing my temper and calling him a fucking nutjob, in front of the rest of the class, quite aggressively.

Which you should not do, of course.

 

[Dillinger4]

Which you should not do, of course.

This was after being polite and having it thrown back in my face.



He basically called me a Government Stooge, or something, in less words.

I have never come across this in REAL life. I thought it was all just pretend.

 

[Corax]

Base your Methodology dissertation on their lack of.

 

[Dillinger4]

I suppose writing about the nature of conspiracy theories might be interesting.

Jesus I am so fucking angry.

 

[frogwoman]

I don't blame you mate I would be too.

Jesus, what is happening to education these days?

*cries*

 

[BlackSpecs]

Having been through art college and having attended lectures by David Icke and people like him :

trust me when I say you should take the whole thing as ENTERTAINMENT !...seriously !!!

Remember ...

 

[Demosthenes]

I don't know.

The lunatic fringe of what I arbitrarily call " my mind", often ends up thinking,

probably the reason the twin towers fell down in 2001, is because they always fall down in 2001.

 

[BlackSpecs]

I think they fell down because two jets twatted into them ..... simple as that really !

Edit : Why they (the planes) did so is a different matter !

 

[butchersapron]

Which you should not do, of course.

2 hail marys as well.

 

[jæd]

So I have just finished a dissertation tutorial, on Methodology for my dissertation. This involved me working in a group with other people, so we went round discussing our research topics.

One guy starts telling me how he is writing his Dissertation on the 9/11 Truth movement, and starts telling me that there is a conspiracy, they pulled down tower seven, etc etc. I have heard it all before from here.

It escalates, with me losing my temper and calling him a fucking nutjob, in front of the rest of the class, quite aggressively. Only because he was talking complete and utter shit.

I don't understand how he can possibly carry out research on a subject that is not even based on fact.

This person obviously has a dissertation tutor. And he has met his dissertation tutor, who must have agreed that this is a subject that needs further research. I am just glad that he can only fail on this particular subject.

I just don't understand at all. I probably shouldn't even post this thread, as it will only end up summoning more nut jobs. But I find this so incomprehensible.

I can see a dissertation into the Psychology of Conspiraloons being interesting. But a dissertation supporting conspiraloonery...? That would be full of fail, unless standards have completely fallen...!

 

[Dillinger4]

I have a feeling he has not actually fully explained what he wants to do yet. Or else he would have been TOLD.

 

[kyser_soze]

Have you spoken privately to the tutor concerned about this, and the department/faculty head? Allowing someone to pursue this is really fucking poor academically.

At least if you do a counter you've got a rich source for argument

 

[laptop]

This involved me working in a group with other people...
One guy starts telling me how he is writing his Dissertation on the 9/11 Truth movement, and starts telling me that there is a conspiracy...

So you have to work with this guy who less than zero understanding - an anti-understanding - of methodology, and you're assessed on this joint work?

If so, put a reservation in writing to your tutor and your professor now.

Then make yer man happy in his uniqueness by arranging that the rest of the group can work together while he produces a Minority Report.

 

[Jazzz]

err... isn't his dissertation HIS business, not yours?

And how would you describe the notion of 'academic freedom'?

I would say this guy has it right absolutely, you are indeed a stooge, a willing little fascist who seeks to restrict academic freedom because it's not to your taste!

Grow up!

 

[Dillinger4]

err... isn't his dissertation HIS business, not yours?

And how would you describe the notion of 'academic freedom'?

I would say this guy has it right absolutely, you are indeed a stooge, a willing little fascist who seeks to restrict academic freedom because it's not to your taste!

Grow up!

I just wonder where how he will research something which, by definition, cannot be proven. There are fundemental problems in this.

He told me one of his sources for Data was videos on Youtube. He explained to me that he thought it would be useful because it really looked like the building was being demolished.

I just don't understand how this will work as a project.

I am not saying he shouldn't try. I am just wondering how he can do anything but fail.



I am proper baffled.

And as for being called a 'stooge' for questioning the validity of using 9/11 truth videos on youtube for his research, then, I think I know which one of us needs to grow up.

Its not me btw.

 

[Larry O'Hara]

perhaps you might direct your neurally-challenged friend to check this site out: www.911cultwatch.org.uk . He won't like it though....

 

[Dillinger4]

So you have to work with this guy who less than zero understanding - an anti-understanding - of methodology, and you're assessed on this joint work?

If so, put a reservation in writing to your tutor and your professor now.

Then make yer man happy in his uniqueness by arranging that the rest of the group can work together while he produces a Minority Report.

I am not being marked on this so its not a problem really, except extremely irritating - whilst I am slogging my guts out doing real research collecting statistics and trying to design my research he just sits there fucking bullshitting in a way that, to be honest, I found verging on offensive.

He was only a step away from expressing some more extreme views.

I don't think the lecturer of my dissertation meeting quite knew what he was talking about.

But somebody, somewhere in my university, is responsible for guiding him, and is clearly encouraging him to write this bullshit.

 

[kyser_soze]

...
Then make yer man happy in his uniqueness by arranging that the rest of the group can work together while he produces a Minority Report.

Dillinger4, yesterday

 

[fela fan]

Have you spoken privately to the tutor concerned about this, and the department/faculty head? Allowing someone to pursue this is really fucking poor academically.

No, not necessarily. Depends for a start on the degree being taken; it's not clear to me what that degree is.

Why do you say such a topic is academically poor? On what basis can you declare this so? I thought being in the academic community let you explore any which thing you wanted, so long as you used certain guidelines in the writing of it.

Are you asking dillinger to ask the tutor to censor his classmate? Who is it that gets to control the agenda? To control what topic can or cannot be talked about?

 

[Dillinger4]

No, not necessarily. Depends for a start on the degree being taken; it's not clear to me what that degree is.

Why do you say such a topic is academically poor? On what basis can you declare this so? I thought being in the academic community let you explore any which thing you wanted, so long as you used certain guidelines in the writing of it.

Are you asking dillinger to ask the tutor to censor his classmate? Who is it that gets to control the agenda? To control what topic can or cannot be talked about?

FFS. I knew this would attract this kind of bullshit.

Nobody is saying anybody should be 'censored'.

It is impossible to carry out academic research on something that by definition is based on NO facts.

You cannot use youtube as an academic source.

Who ever is telling that this ok, is acting unprofessionally, because it cannot be done and will result in him failing his dissertation.

And I don't appreciate being treated with attitude I was shown for questioning his sources. Its not professional.

 

[fela fan]

But somebody, somewhere in my university, is responsible for guiding him, and is clearly encouraging him to write this bullshit.

If you have not read what he's written yet, then you are in no position to say what he has written is bullshit. That is academically a very poor position to find yourself in.

A far better academic response by you would be to wait until you have read his dissertation once it's finished, and then rebut the points one by one should you so choose.

It's his choice, and of course some tutor somewhere will be backing him, and why not? It's freedom of choice being exercised within appropriate boundaries.

With you yelling your head off at him mate, that is the non-academic behaviour going on around here. You might do better to try and put yourself in the tutor's shoes, and ask yourself why he allowed this dissertation to be undertaken. Try and think what the tutor is thinking, it's a good exercise for you dillinger.

 

[Dillinger4]

Just to reiterate:

Making things up has no place in an academic environment. This person fully acknowledged nothing he could argue could proved, that it was counterfactual and could not be falsified.

This might be more reasonable, MAYBE, if it were a PhD project. But how are you supposed to prove the US government was complicit in 9/11, in an undergraduate dissertation of 10,000 words or less?

 

[Dillinger4]

If you have not read what he's written yet, then you are in no position to say what he has written is bullshit. That is academically a very poor position to find yourself in.

A far better academic response by you would be to wait until you have read his dissertation once it's finished, and then rebut the points one by one should you so choose.

It's his choice, and of course some tutor somewhere will be backing him, and why not? It's freedom of choice being exercised within appropriate boundaries.

With you yelling your head off at him mate, that is the non-academic behaviour going on around here. You might do better to try and put yourself in the tutor's shoes, and ask yourself why he allowed this dissertation to be undertaken. Try and think what the tutor is thinking, it's a good exercise for you dillinger.

You don't get it, do you?

I would say that you have an agenda, and are not listening to what I am actually saying.

 

[fela fan]

FFS. I knew this would attract this kind of bullshit.

Nobody is saying anybody should be 'censored'.

It is impossible to carry out academic research on something that by definition is based on NO facts.

You cannot use youtube as an academic source.

Who ever is telling that this ok, is acting unprofessionally, because it cannot be done and will result in him failing his dissertation.

And I don't appreciate being treated with attitude I was shown for questioning his sources. Its not professional.

Now just keep your hair on. We don't want a repeat performance from your class where you yelled at him...

There is nowhere that says you cannot research something you cannot prove or disprove. Research, inherently, can be about anything. Hey, you can even research research with no need to prove anything. If you have to prove something, then it's not research, it's something else.

Are you sure you can't use youtube as an academic source? Is it in your uni rules? I'd be surprised, it's an example of an internet phenomenon and well worth using in one's research. How can you say it is unprofessional? Based on what?

 

[Dillinger4]

1)If you have not read what he's written yet, then you are in no position to say what he has written is bullshit. That is academically a very poor position to find yourself in.

2)A far better academic response by you would be to wait until you have read his dissertation once it's finished, and then rebut the points one by one should you so choose.

3)It's his choice, and of course some tutor somewhere will be backing him, and why not? It's freedom of choice being exercised within appropriate boundaries.

4)With you yelling your head off at him mate, that is the non-academic behaviour going on around here. You might do better to try and put yourself in the tutor's shoes, and ask yourself why he allowed this dissertation to be undertaken. Try and think what the tutor is thinking, it's a good exercise for you dillinger.

1) I am not saying what has written is bullshit. I am saying what he going to write is bullshit, because you cant use Youtube as a viable academic source. It had not been peer reviewed.

2) I will. But I will also question his bullshit non academic sources before he even starts. Thats how academia and peer review works.

3) Its unprofessional at best for an academic to be encouraging a topic of research that cannot be researched.

4) Fuck off. You clearly have not read what I have said.

 

[Dillinger4]

Now just keep your hair on. We don't want a repeat performance from your class where you yelled at him...

There is nowhere that says you cannot research something you cannot prove or disprove. Research, inherently, can be about anything. Hey, you can even research research with no need to prove anything. If you have to prove something, then it's not research, it's something else.

Are you sure you can't use youtube as an academic source? Is it in your uni rules? I'd be surprised, it's an example of an internet phenomenon and well worth using in one's research. How can you say it is unprofessional? Based on what?

You cannot research something that cannot be factually proved. It is unscientific to try and argue something that is unfalsifiable and counterfactual, not to mention full of a great many other philosophical fallacies.

No you can't use youtube as an academic source. It has not been peer reviewed.

 

[Dillinger4]

Look. Put it this way. If he could do this, It would have already been done, by somebody far smarter than him, using sources such as government documents or whatever.

 

[FridgeMagnet]

You just have to ignore this stuff, unless it looks like it becomes some sort of department policy, devaluing your own efforts. It probably won't get a very good mark anyway, and there's no point in trying to convince the bloke.

Ignoring fela is also quite a good option I find.

 

[Dillinger4]

I imagine you know Noam Chomsky?

Well imagine if Noam Chomsky wrote a new book saying: "Right, honestly, I watched this video on Youtube, and it just really looks like it was pulled down. honestly! - I reckon the US Government did it! Really! Coz like you know... I don't know they must do, it REALLY looks like it!"

ETC ETC ad infinitum.

You wouldn't take what he has to say so seriously then would you?