No More Comments at

After much deliberation, we have decided to follow the lead of other prominent web sites that have removed public comments from their principle articles. Skeptoid episode transcripts no longer have comment sections.


First, after years of doing this, it’s become clear that comments are a net loss for the quality of the content. Most of the time, comments constitute misinformation: rants and disagreement with the fruits of our research. This misinformation typically far exceeds the word count of our articles; for our articles presenting a reasoned analysis of 9/11 events, there was as much as 75 times as much content on the page promoting absurd conspiracy theories. We no longer choose to promote this nonsense alongside our hard work.

Second, promoting discussion on the site does not bring new people in. The more discussion can be pushed outward, by using the share links on the new transcript pages, the more new people off-site will find out about Skeptoid.

Third, moderating comments and keeping up with the site maintenance to accommodate them is a drain of resources that are better spent elsewhere. We want to focus instead on the quality of our content and on creating new and better projects.

Fourth, we followed the scientific method and checked the database to see whether the same people who support us (our organization is funded almost entirely by listener donations) are the same ones who comment on the episode transcripts and subscribe to our emails. The answer was a resounding no. In fact, in our nine-year history, almost nobody first came to us by commenting on an episode and later became financial supporters. Instead, supporters have always been doing what we love: Posting links to the episodes on their social media and elsewhere, and driving the conversation on external venues where new people see it and learn about it. Conversely, commenters tend to be hit and run.

Sites such as Popular Science, Snopes, Wikipedia, and many others made this decision long ago, for similar reasons. We want Skeptoid to be a resource, not a graffiti wall.

Criticism of this decision has mainly been that we are not open to criticism. If this is your conclusion, we haven’t explained the decision very well. The decision not to give equal time to misinformation does not mean we’re not open to criticism. Those familiar with Skeptoid know that we dedicate entire episodes to criticism and disagreement in our Listener Feedback shows. In this venue, misinformation is presented in proper context. Our contact page remains open to anyone with useful feedback, corrections, and other suggestions; and as those familiar with the show know, we also dedicate entire episodes to such corrections. We’re very open to criticism; we’re just not open to defacement.

We are also not open to providing flagrant pseudoscience on our pages alongside our good information. Much of the commentary consists of simple disagreement with sound science or true history. Antisemitism, conspiracy mongering, vaccine denial, and promotion of alt-med charlatans does not belong on a web site devoted to providing the best science we can. It is not to the benefit of readers coming here for information if we provide them misinformation alongside it.

The net result is that Skeptoid episode pages are now much better for sharing. They are better for classrooms, better for curious web surfers, and better for anyone looking to learn. And that is, ultimately, what we’re about.

For now, comments remain on the blog as always. Feel free to chime in.

About Brian Dunning

Science writer Brian Dunning is the host and producer of Skeptoid.
This entry was posted in Education, Skeptoid Podcast. Bookmark the permalink.

235 Responses to No More Comments at

  1. Pavel says:

    Comments or no comments, I will always love Skeptoid 🙂

    • Some enterprising person could start a separate blog for comments to Skeptoid. That would allow those who wish to comment a place to do it while relieving Brian of an annoying and thankless task.

  2. Kathy Juarez says:

    Thank you.

  3. Gustav Rennick says:

    Disappointing decision but understandable. Always my favourite site for interesting and relevant information.

    Keep up the great work everyone.

  4. r wesley edwards says:

    Agree and applaud the decision.

    • sszorin says:

      A turkey voting for Thanksgiving dinner.

    • danR says:

      I disagree with the decision, with qualifications, and must be one of the non-existent commenters who Brian’s database found didn’t donate.

      I didn’t donate any further, based on sign-in protocols to comment that I won’t elaborate.

  5. MBDK says:

    I get it. I did enjoy reading some of the more outlandish comments, though. It made me feel better about the intellect of friends I previously classified as stupid.

  6. Barry Coldrick says:

    Just thought I would check if I could still comment. Totally understand your decision. Keep up the good work.

  7. DanielWainfleet says:

    I have seen the same phenomenon at :Comments that are endless rants of dogmatic ignorance.

  8. Jason says:

    This comment does not exist. If you are reading it, you have super-powers to be debunked in a future Skeptoid episode.

  9. Nathan says:

    I agree with this decision. I usually just avoided reading the comment sections because it always just made me angry. Lol.

    But where will you get most of your feedback for the listener feedback episodes now?

  10. IdPnSD says:

    Yes, it is very difficult to accept and maintain democracy. There was a time when only one man knew the truth and he was Galileo. And he was jailed for telling the truth. The rest of us, billions of them had no idea that we did not know that we did not know. It is true even now. There is no truth in the mainstream. Less than 1% knows the truth. Ayn Rand said – “Truth is not for all men, but only for those who seek it.” To remain in safe side, it is best to stop the truth. Look at the blog site it has a chapter on truth.

    • sszorin says:

      Mister, your knowledge of history testifies to the fact that even the sites that hide behind the moniker “Sceptic” should be challenged with scepticism. You must either got your ridiculous fairy tale about Galileo on this website or you got brainwashed somewhere else and then confirmed your delusion.

      • IdPnSD says:

        Why the Galileo story is ridiculous? Are we not all brainwashed in our own ways?

        But truth is unique. If you suppress commenting then the person who knows the truth, like Galileo, will not be able to present the truth to the universe.

  11. Daniel Morrow says:

    Media “news outlets” are part of the blame. They want to appear impartial to the content they publish. The net result is that they will give equal time to quackery and true science. For example the media consider opinions related to creation science on par with evolutionary science. This impartial approach have embolden intuition thinkers who believe they have a right to say anything they want, without rhyme or reason. Some religious groups believe anything published that is not of their religion is effectively against their religion.

    We have to take back control of the word. Fact is fact. Theory is fact until proven otherwise, and each theory has its own unique facts and observations to support them. There is little to no room for opinion.

    We shouldn’t have dialog or arguments which put intuition over reasoning, or even give it the same footing.

    This is not an opinion. 🙂

  12. Paul Carter Block says:

    Bravo, Brian.
    The end-of-the-world in September did it for me. Some of the commenters were clearly bonkers and re-reading the same drivel was a tiresome distraction.
    A good time to move on.
    Thanks for the hard work.

  13. Marian Whitcomb says:

    I think it makes sense not to give space and time to charlatans…wish more media would do that with Trump. I do read comments, because I think knowing how the “others” think is worth while, and it is often great satire. I do understand. Marketing is important, and not wasting your time on people who are not paying in is what marketing is all about these days (sigh).

  14. Wilko says:

    Great idea. I think all websites should do this. It is in my benefit because I spend way too much time on the comments.

  15. Sia says:

    Well, I did enjoy my time lurking and regret not commenting more while I had the chance. Ah, well. Life goes on.

  16. Diane Cavaness says:

    Thank you. I agree that some of the garbage posted under the guise of intelligent discourse does indeed detract from the real research you present.

  17. Pete Harned says:

    I would kiss you if I thought it wouldn’t be uncomfortable for everyone. Great decision.

  18. Johnny Alpha says:

    “After much deliberation, we have decided to follow the lead of other prominent web sites that have removed public comments from their principle articles.”

    That’s principal, not principle. If you remove the ability to post comments, how will pedantic internet commandos like me ever be able to correct you?

    Ah – I think I understand your motivation now…

  19. JP says:

    Good decision; good explanation.

  20. Rich Murray says:

    I think this decision will strengthen the cohesiveness and clarity of your sharing of mainstream scientific consensus about a very wide range of topics.

    There is this decade a remarkable paradigm shift about our experiential understanding about the foundation of all experience: conscious awareness, within which all experience is sensed and represented — note the annual Science And NonDuality Conference SAND. Thoughtful experts can indeed reach consensus about effective explorations and repeatable experiences in expanded states of awareness.

    Vegan diet as a key to human health is also evolving substantially:

    Skeptics can also check out multiple lines of evidence for the WC Monte paradigm of chronic methanol toxicity in humans …

  21. Graeme Nitz says:

    I can understand the decision, some of the idiotic comments were just plain outrageous!

    I used to read a lot just for laughs.

  22. Brian Wall says:

    I have to agree with my namesake Brian – I think comments on articles are invariably by those who think they know better but then cleverly prove they don’t! Makes for a chuckle sometimes, but not very conductive to rational discussion.

  23. H. Smith says:

    So mute everyone because a few nuts post about some wild conspiracy theory. Maybe we could just toss the right to free speech? Just kidding but like anything there is the slippery slope to consider. Once you get no feedback you are preaching and dictating. Good luck with the site.

    • Daniel Morrow says:

      The point is that what people write is not on equal ground. Free speech is a right, but on condition of time and place. What was written in the comments, obfuscated the message.

      The value of Skeptoid is to provide a service to the community where members of the community cannot be subject mater experts on the topics covered. We depend on factual, non-biased coverage to have an informed view on not only fun and interesting bits of knowledge and popular culture, but also vital subjects important to us all.

      Case in point. Recently a light was viewed across the sky over California, seen from many vantage points. This light looked odd. After some time, the US Navy admitted that they were test launching a Titan II rocket, from a sub. I wanted to see images of what this looked like. I was met with literally page after page of conspiracy theories related to “portals”, H.A.R.P. and LHC experiments gone wrong – alien preparations of invasion, fake government holograms to produce a fake scare of the next alien invasion. This stuff is all out there, burying the facts.

      Why on Earth would you want that nonsense crowding a forum about facts? This isn’t free speech. This is flat out lying, click bate, hit whoring. People like attention, whimsically posting anything for ad-revenue.

      Anyway who’s voice did we come here for? I look for Brian’s voice, and I am so glad he has come back to the mic, full time. – Thanks Brian.

      A special note to the hosts over the past year. I have enjoyed everyone of you. You brought enlightenment and a nice cadre to listen to. Yes, I have my favorites.

      • MBDK says:

        Daniel, well put. Although I comment earlier about getting some humor from a few of the comments, you have addressed the reality of the situation. After all, if I want to read/debate the fringe phantoms, there are PLENTY of other venues to do it in.

  24. toffer99 says:

    Good decision. Keep the morons at bay.

  25. Charles says:

    Gotta admit I never visited the comments section much myself, and the time I did (for the episode on Holocaust deniers) I was pretty much disgusted at what I read there.

    That being said, I will also miss seeing you properly put down the Tin Hats who choose to comment as well ^_^

    • sszorin says:

      Deniers of which Holocaust ? There were several of them. Denial of which one is a stone in your shoe ? How can people understand you when you are not specific ?

      • bandit, Albuquerque says:

        “Deniers of which Holocaust ?” – This is generally used to reference the 6 million Jews (not to mention the 6 million “undesirables” and 6 million Russian peasants) that the Nazis killed in WWII. And the various military casualties on all sides, but that is the costs of the military in wartime.

        Despite, of course, the Nazis kept excellent records on who they killed. Not to mention the reports by the Allies when they found the camps, and the aerial photos they went back and found of the camps.

        But, of course, you knew what the phrase means when you posted the comment. Which one is the stone in *your* shoe?

        Of course, there have been other mass killings in the last few centuries. The Armenians have something to say about one circa 1920.

        • MBDK says:

          I believe the antagonistic sszorin is the very reason for skeptoid’s stance. Off-topic, arrogant and puffing for a tussle. Whatever his/her end game may be, it’s definitely got nothing to do with proper intelligent discussion.

        • sszorin says:

          Kindly tell me why are denials of “Jewish” Holocaust a criminal offense and denials of other Holocausts are not a criminal offense ? Kindly exlain this blatant racism.

          • asydhouse says:

            Denial of the facts of the Holocaust is only illegal in Germany, where the people were keen to prevent surviving Nazis from doing precisely what so many have tried, that is to deny that the Nazis had a “final solution” which was genocidal mass murder.

            I believe the above mentioned Armenians have the opposite situation in Turkey, where it is illegal to admit that the genocide of Armenians happened, and was the work of the Turkish government.

            Pretty obvious who are the racists in these two scenarios. And pretty obvious that you are an arrogant little s**t pretending to self-righteous superiority, when all you are is an opportunistic self-aggrandising mouth-off artist.

            You are one of the people whose self-important b******t has made Brian’s decision necessary, and welcomed by anyone with an objective intelligence when it comes to reasoned and evidenced matters of science and factual accuracy.

            Swallow it and p**s off.

  26. William J Granger says:

    Well I guess I represent the silent majority that will be sad to see the comment section go. I for one am a believer in free speech even though I agree it may border on the absurd and ridiculous. That is the price we pay for living in a free society. Plus I was often amused by many of the comments and I am not easily amused. Brian, please reconsider this and I will be the first to make a generous donation to the cause.

  27. Bill Kowalski says:

    For several years I’ve noticed a handful of rather trollish people who chronically haunt the comments, but other than to argue with them, could think of no practical way to shut their noise holes. Brian, you have done it. I think we can get along just fine without comments.

    • Joe says:

      Or you know, you could just not reply to them or ignore them. An ignore button would be nice. :/

      In almost any other case, I’d say reading the comments are often more interesting than the articles, but this site seems to be the exception to the rule. This isn’t like newspapers or most blogs.

  28. Stephen Erdmann says:

    The attepmt to control those who disagree with you is called: Neophobia, Cainophobia, Cainotophobia, Cenophobia, Centophobia, Kainolophobia, Kainophobia – An abnormal and persistent fear of anything new including new things, ideas or situations, of novelty.

    • bandit, Albuquerque says:

      Quote: An abnormal and persistent fear of anything new including new things, ideas or situations, of novelty

      @Stephen misses the point or is a troll. The comments after the reports were rarely novel – they were the (ahem) loyal opposition. My bet is he is a troll.

    • Erique says:

      Really? Well I guess the conspiracy nuts are suffering from all of them, think about what you have typed…the reason you folks comment at all is because Skeptiod disagrees with your position. Think about that.

  29. Gail Norman says:

    Darn, I was learning so much from the anti-GMO and anti-vaccine crowd! Keep up the good work.

  30. Random Poster says:

    I agree. Im really tired,.to be honest, of all comment sections.

  31. Not as tired as I am. Like all good skeptics I first questioned and argued the decision. After discussion of the evidence and review of my own bias. I am forced to agree that it needs to happen. I look forward to the end of the comment moderation.

  32. Peter says:

    I’ll miss Mackey. And I think you’re making a big mistake. You’re removing comments just as many news sites are starting them. Just limit the time like everyone else

  33. Bill Kowalski says:

    Actually, it’s not just Skeptoid’s problem. The whole internet is a bit of a toilet. When everyone has a voice we get to see how cruel, base and crude we humans can be. I’d be happy if the whole damn thing disappeared and never came back.

    • Carl Maniscalco says:

      Case in point, YouTube comments.

    • Erique says:

      The internet is a toilet, indeed, it is hard to spot the condoms from the turds…

      What really gets me is we live in a wonderful age of information, it is so easy to get the right information if you think for yourself, a lot of urban myths and the ilk are dealt with by Skeptiod and other sites like Snopes…yet still intelligent people believe the trash repeated on Facebook, Twitter etc…that often link to an obvious lunatic’s conspiracy site. I have intelligent friends who believe that KFC changed its name because they can’t legally use the word chicken any more, as there is no real chicken in it any more, that the Paris bombings were predicted on Twitter…absolutely mindboggling…

  34. Kev says:

    I notice that my comment of more than 5 days ago was not posted.
    In that comment I referred to you saying something along the lines of absurd conspiracy theories of 9-11.
    I pointed out that most Americans do not believe the main stream narrative about 9-11. I also said that many respected scientists and engineers do not buy it either. I also said that for this reason I will not be following your blog any further.

    You only proved me to be correct and you being a shill and or disinfo agent by not posting my comment.
    You have gone the way of the majority of journalists in this country. You write and discuss only what is politically correct or at least what is not frowned upon by main stream media which was bought and paid for by the power elite many years ago.

    I am sure you sleep well at night. I would not be able to personally…

    • Noah Dillon says:

      Sorry your comment didn’t get posted. I’m sorry you can’t use this blog to spread nonsense while you ignore perfectly rational counter arguments. So long!

      • Kev says:

        I am unfazed that the truth is called nonsense by those who serve the agenda of the elite. I am also not bothered that I am not received on venues like yours. Actually I would be concerned for my salvation if you were to receive me.
        That was all I wanted thank you.

        And while you did post the comment above, you did not post my first one. Which says everything.
        Thank you for showing where your allegiance lies. I was hoping that you would show your true colors.

        • MBDK says:

          “I am also not bothered that I am not received on venues like yours.”
          Well, your post indicates just the opposite, but, of course, you will still deny the obvious. In addition, the fact being NOBODY is to be received in further articles, you purposely attempt to make your (deluded IMHO) opinion seem more important that anyone else’s.
          This is why we can’t have nice things. Or reasonable internet debates.

          • Kev says:

            Oh My…Please believe me. I am not bothered. really I am not…

            Give me a break. Yeah I like to be heard like anyone else.
            But you really think I am surprised when I am not?

            I suppose to be honest though I did have a dichotomy of caring and not caring when my first post wasn’t posted.
            I think I was really hoping to be able to think better about you guys….

          • MBDK says:

            “Oh My…Please believe me. I am not bothered. really I am not…”
            Thou dost protest too much.

          • Kev says:

            Yeah sarcasm can be tricky in print…

    • Erique says:

      @Kev, do you know what logical fallacies are?

      I see the appeal to the majority (kind of) and the appeal to authority, both say nothing about your case.

      Even if 99% of all Americans didn’t believe the ‘official’ 9/11 position, that has nothing to do with the counter claim by conspiracy folks, 99% of people could be wrong…that’s why skeptics like evidence,over opinions.

      Similarly, experts in science and engineering can be wrong, and for sure the ones ‘denying’ the ‘official’ version of events are not in the majority, so in your paragraph you have two logical fallacies, and the first wipes out the second (can you see that)?

      If you want to go by numbers, there are over 300 million Americans, is the petition to reinvestigate ANYWHERE near that figure? No. So, our appeal to the majority fails, anyway.

      In short, it makes no difference how many, peons, proles, scientists, engineers or even gibbons think 9/11 was an inside job (or whatever) what matters is evidence, and you folks have none…which is why it is still a conspiracy theory, and not a conspiracy fact.

      • Joe says:

        Or like with the case of 1-million-byte megabytes, the experts are from a different field from where the convention of powers of 2 came from, and wonder why they’re getting such opposition. Even if they’re technically correct, they’ve just made MB and megabytes useless terms because now it can mean 2 things to the majority of readers. It was bad enough when hard drive and memory companies couldn’t agree, but programmers could ignore the ‘fuzzy’ numbers except when dealing with special cases like telecommunications (which don’t generally physically use exact powers of anything thanks to encapsulation and error correction/timing bits). Megaoctets would have been clearer and not break context clues, but oh well. This stuff should have been fixed back in 1980, if it was really that important and worth ruining the language (temporarily) for.

        Same with the cold fusion ‘experts’ who didn’t understand why physicists didn’t buy it for a second. Something that magically violates Coulomb’s law, reminding me of the “1) xxx 2) yyy 3) ??? 4) Profit!” joke. Too good to be true. TINSTAAFL – The ultimate skeptical slogan!

  35. Merlo says:

    That’s sad. Comments are what turns simple content into a feeling of community. It’s a chance for dialogue and I’ve read many-a-great comment here on skeptoid. Would moderated comments, without crazy rants be better? Yes, they would be! But even so, they mean a lot. A man and a donkey are smarter than a man alone, so skeptoid turning into “one guy and his opinion with all other voices silent” will be a huge step back. Heck, I’m “one guy with an opinion” so might as well run a commentless blog myself 🙂

  36. In a way it’s unfortunate not to be able to comment but you’re right. Comment sections have become sewers. Who reads more than the first few anyway? It is unlikely that anyone reads more than 10. Most comments are illiterate attacks. I get the feeling most are written by high school (or grade school) dropouts at best. If comments could be vetted it would be nice, but I can understand how expensive that would be. I’ll get used to comments not being there–except wnen I get really riled up!

  37. Tom Dietrich says:

    Right! There are no government conspiracies! There are no government false flag operations! Governments do not lie to the people! Government reports are to be believed! Anyone who presents information that contradicts a government report is a traitor who should not be allowed to speak! Government whistle blowers are not to be believed since they are traitors. We should believe whatever the CIA, FBI, NSA, etc. tells us since they would not lie or cover-up crimes of politicians. You can believe our Presidents who would never lie to the pubic to cover their ass. Bush, Clinton, Obama, etc. are close to being saints who we should adore and worship. And of course Skeptics can not tolerate anyone who contradicts them. If you do not agree with a Skeptic, you are a “tin foil hat person”. Yes, Skeptics are near Gods. Oh yes, and we don’t have a Police State where the NSA has access to all your electronic communications. That’s just an urban legend. And the Snowdens of the world should be hung as traitors. How dare he tell the American people they are being spied on by their government.

    • Noah Dillon says:

      Jesus. That sure is a lot of straw men. Anyone with a match oughta be careful.

      The alternative to “reptile aliens killed JFk and then did 9/11” is not “we should believe everything the government says because they’re perfect.” Watergate was a government conspiracy. Iran-Contra was a government conspiracy. The toppling of the Diem regime was a government conspiracy. The Bay of Pigs was a government conspiracy. The Bush administration’s push for a war in Iraq was a government conspiracy. But all these conspiracies were demonstrated with evidence. It was long been surmised by reporters that the NSA was spying on people. Snowden provided an enormous amount of evidence for how that was done.

      It’s great to be skeptical of government. And it’s entirely possible to do so without being a tinfoil hat nut.

      • Erique says:

        @Noah Dillon, well said, sir!!

        This is what the conspiracy theorists do not seem to get, yes there are conspiracies that proved to be right, there are real conspiracies out there in the real world, but they are totally irrelevant, as each conspiracy should stand on its own merit and evidence. You can’t take a proven conspiracy like ‘Bay of Pigs’, and use that as supporting evidence that another conspiracy theory has merit.

        I really do not understand how such illogical thinking comes from rational human brains…

        • Jeb says:

          I knew you would not post my comment. The truth is dangerous to the Powers That Be.

          You guys are full of S**T. It stinks real bad but at least y’all get the bills paid huh?

          • Noah Dillon says:

            Dude, the people who post on this site are unpaid volunteers. They’re not “the Powers That Be.” I don’t know what comment you tried to post, but we don’t typically approve stuff that has curse words in it because this is supposed to be available and appropriate for a readership that includes children. Just because you don’t get your way on a moderated comment thread doesn’t mean that anyone’s oppressing you. If you want to post your free speech there are plenty of free blog platforms and other forums where you can do so. Maybe you, unlike Skeptoid, can use paid advertising and get some money for the time you put into expressing yourself.

  38. Tom Dietrich says:

    Yes please do notify me.

  39. Dutch says:

    I have to say I’m very disappointed by this decision. What I’ve always liked about most skeptics are their willingness to debate anyone, anywhere, on anything. Stand up for the facts and the scientific method. Things like this and declining debate invitations adds fuel to the fire that skeptics are just as close minded as those we argue against. The comments offer a good place to view common objections to a subject and how best to rebut them. I think this is a major mistake for the “community”

    • Daniel Morrow says:

      I would tend to disagree that skeptics are “willing to debate anyone.” I think that many would agree there are a lot of spun wheels in Skeptiod’s forums. The rhetorical quagmire reduces the quality of the initial investigation. Engaging in discussion for the purpose of enlightenment, surely is rewarding for anyone. But it’s simple to see when you are up against a brick wall and further engagement is counter productive.

      On this one blog post alone, I see the very reason for turning off comments. Part is trolling and part is due to some of the contributors, unwilling to engage properly in the discussion. They either don’t get the topic, or think that it’s part of the greater Don Quixote-esque conspiracy platform of many variations.

      I think a separate forum, is valid. One which allows the blog posts to exist in whole while much of the dialog about the topic is bantered about with much greater freedom.

  40. Phil says:

    Big mistake _ the whole point of Skeptoid was that it was itself open to challenge – I have seen some dreadful rubbish in its main articles – Sorry but everyone makes mistakes

    The comments sections allowed these flaws to be discussed – Blocking that possibility I am afraid creates the very arrogance in defending one potentially inaccurate view that Skeptoid was about

    I think the greatest real flaw with Skeptoid is that it has worked through major items and needs to revisit earlier topics – It is the victim of its own efficiency in dispelling misinformation. But it is also flawed in there are some areas it refuses to touch and skirts round them. Comments made it possible to point that out

    As an overseas reader the sillier comments in Skeptoid demonstrated that the comments section was needed to air ignorance and dispel it. That is how people learn. It is bad to discourage that process

  41. brad tittle says:

    Allocation of resources. I don’t blame anyone for turning off comments. I have been turning them off since I first started on Newsgroups 24 years ago. The news groups were fun, but then the signal to noise ratio diminished to a point of nonsense. All of the variations of forums and comments have succumbed to noise.

    But I am commented now….

    So I haven’t completely despaired.

  42. erique says:

    I comment occasionally, but can understand the decision, some people seem to ‘haunt’ the comments and get righteously indignant if they say something and you don’t get back to them for months or ever.

    It just gets very despairing to see an article that goes some way to disprove some dodgy thinking, to have the comment section full of advocates for it, using the same flawed and disproved arguments they get from conspiracy sites.

    My only concern is, what will Macky do with his days now?

  43. WiNoJoE says:

    Bad, cowardly decision. Comments are one of the best feature of sites, and I don’t don’t read those that don’t have them. Bye bye!

    PS – your podcasts have been boring as hell lately too.

  44. Lisa M says:

    I look forward to the distilled crazy that will comprise future “listener feedback” episodes. Maybe we could get those more frequently as a kind of consolation prize?

  45. Tom says:

    Good decision, excellent reasoning. And, as always, trollish dissenters aren’t reading what they are responding to.

  46. Tom Dietrich says:

    My problems with Skeptics is that they accept government reports as the authoritarian final say. The Warren Report said Lee Harvey Oswald shot JFK and no one else was involved. Anyone who presents evidence that refutes that conclusion is a conspiracy nut. The 9/11 Commission Report says 19 Arab Terrorists crashed the 4 planes into the World Trade Center Towers, the Pentagon and a field in PA. End of story. Anyone who presents evidence that contradicts that is a conspiracy nut. Why do Skeptics believe government reports written by corrupt government politicians and officials? Strange very strange indeed. Unless of course they have a connection to one of the intelligence agencies. That would explain it.

    • Daniel Morrow says:

      Do you even understand what you just wrote? You are referring, as example, the two single most documented cases in modern US history. The government doesn’t have to say anything, and the result would be the same. A conspiracy nut will be unable to produce a single consistent documented group of facts in order form a coherent provable conclusion. What we know about 9/11 and J.F.K. are hardly conspiracy. We don’t have to take the government’s word. We know who actually did it. Just like the Boston Marathon, we have the perpetrator.

      But alas, we we have experience here, all you have to do is say the sun is blue, and then it turns into a government conspiracy about making everyone think it’s not. Another example, go read the Russian Sleep Experiment.

      The truth is, real provable conspiracies – do not last. There are too many moving parts to keep it secret or under wraps. Ultimately undeniable documentation surfaces.

  47. james says:

    I believe that the ability to comment is paramount for a free society, unfortunately the current populace is too uneducated to enjoy it.

    • danR says:

      There are many straightforward methods to deal with misguided commenting. For example, make it clear from the outset that a formalized response will required, and that commenters’ delay-to-post (if ever)will be weighted according to adherence to a given template:

      >3-line, clear, thesis statement. Paragraph 1
      >10 line body. Paragraph 2
      >3 line conclusion. Paragraph 3

      If commenters don’t know what these things are, several examples could be given. Or they could go and find out for themselves, with the advice that they are not in kindergarten around here, and if they are in kindergarten, they will shortly be the better prepared for university.

      And, after 3 months, commenters will be required to make at least a 10 dollar donation.

      I can almost guarantee the quality of commenting will improve, that the time needed to review the comments for compliance will dwindle drastically, the ability of readers to formulate a more academically-minded give-and-take exchange will improve (readers will become practitioners of rational output, rather than mere observers), that support for Skeptoid will improve, that Skeptoid will become something of a model for the skeptical and rational-thinking community, etc.

      Furthermore, commenters themselves could be mobilized to flag for attention non-compliant comments, and their ability to flag according to the criteria (not their opinion of the comment-content) would be weighted. As Brian knows all about programming this sort of stuff, it’s not going to be a great mystery to work up the algorithms and code. The very announcement that something like this would be in the works would quickly eliminate half the junk-comments before it was even deployed.

      This is not to say there wouldn’t be a certain overhead taxing moderators’ time, but it would be mostly at the outset. Compliance would come faster than you’d think, to the point that moderation, civility, and rationality would become almost self-policing.

      • danR says:

        Those greater-thans should be less-thans!

        < 3-line, clear, thesis statement. Paragraph 1
        < 10 line body. Paragraph 2
        < 3 line conclusion. Paragraph 3

  48. danR says:

    How amusing. So many comments commending the demise of commenting on Skeptoid. One commenter ironically appreciates the loss of content that he (says he) never reads.

    I recall, by analogy, an oceanography course at university. One (very senior) student seemed to enjoy questioning, at considerable length, some tenets of climate change theory and evidence, apparently geriatrically oblivious to the fact that his queries were often threatening to run into minutes-long rants. Our prof did in fact give him a generous amount of time, thinking I suppose, that the freedom to vent misguided skepticism trumped the downside of lost instruction and potential confusion of the students.

  49. Macky says:

    “This misinformation typically far exceeds the word count of our articles; for our articles presenting a reasoned analysis of 9/11 events, there was as much as 75 times as much content on the page promoting absurd conspiracy theories. We no longer choose to promote this nonsense alongside our hard work.”

    Well Brian, I didn’t see too many absurd conspiracy theories in place of your assertions of many of your articles that took up 50% or more space redefining and debunking conspiracy theories.

    When one looks at the Pentagon Missile thread, I for one never promoted any CT whatsoever, but provided clear official evidence via US govt agency files that are still current that directly conflicted with the US govt Official Story or 9-11 and Flight 77 in particular.

    NOBODY, yourself or so-called skeptics commented on any of them from the time they were posted on 31 March 2014, to the day you closed the comments down.

    When it came to contentious issues that affect us all as we speak, Skeptoid had nothing to say to support its position as supporter of the Official Story of 9-11 against evidence that was brought, not from any CT site, but from the very own govt agency that was tasked with the 9-11 investigation, and which was definitive proof that Official Story of who the perps were in 9-11 was nothing but a fabrication designed to set up the Middle East wars, the reason being that Skeptoid was more intent on CT-bashing than actually discussing the subject using its own mandate, Critical Analysis.

    And that’s okay up to a point, but Skeptoid supposedly is a site for critical analysis of pop phenomena, not necessarily CT-bashing, but unfortunately in the above areas mentioned, that’s all Skeptoid became, and the evidence against the US govt Official Story mounted, on various events and subjects as time went on.

    As far as what Macky may do with his time now, Skeptoid was important to me, but was only a small part of my busy day, and is it a shame that those like erique who were asked pertinent questions that they realized would put them in deeper water so remained silent, have now a further excuse never to respond to said questions.

    • Bill Morgan says:

      Macky, Right on my friend! I agree with all of your comments. debunks the official reports of 9/11. I have spent 25 years researching the JFK assassination. Probably, 10,000 hour of research. I’m 100% convinced there was a conspiracy at the highest levels of the US Government. Check out Operation Mockingbird. It’s still operating today. People in the national news media and those who run some (not all) of the Skeptic web sites have CIA, Mossad, FBI,etc. ties. They work for one or more of the Intelligence Agencies. Check out the Deep Politics books by Peter Dale Scott. He shows just how corrupt our government has become. Anyone who trusts the Government to tell us the truth is a fool.

      • Noah Dillon says:

        Have you ever read anything that debunks the 911 and JFK conspiracy claims? Or just things that encourage your belief in those things? Not believing in JFK and September 11 conspiracies doesn’t mean you trust the government. Some people say aliens created those conspiracies; does that mean that anyone who doesn’t believe the consensus account automatically believes aliens were involved? No. Does anyone who doesn’t believe the conspiracy stories take the government at its word about everything? No. You’re making the fallacy of the excluded middle.

    • Mudguts says:

      Jeezers.. I thought you claimed to be Brian’s invited conspiracist and quack promoter..

  50. Macky says:

    Noah, it doesn’t matter WHAT I believe or not when it comes to 9-11. I have mentioned so many times on Skeptoid that if anybody comes up with better evidence than mine in support of the Official US govt story of 9-11, then I would publicly acknowledge that and change my beliefs and I would post accordingly.

    I don’t care about some people talking about aliens, and I don’t know why you brought that up. Your post avoids the plain simple fact that US GOVT’s OWN files (FBI and BTS) DIRECTLY CONFLICT with it’s own Official Story of who planned and carried out 9-11, particularly Flight 77.

    NOBODY on Skeptoid, Brian or posters EVER commented on those several FBI files and the fact that BTS records TO THIS DAY that Flight 77 did NOT occur that 9-11 day, for over 15 months.
    Those files are as close as anybody on the outside could ever get to the truth of what DIDN’T happen on Flight 77, and generally 9-11 as they pertain to the alleged perpetrators. They are files from the very agency that carried out the “investigation”.

    But no. Over 15 months of silence from Skeptoid and the “skeptics”.

    Is that skepticism and critical analysis ?

    Thank you Bill Morgan.
    Some time ago I asked Skeptoid on what grounds it listed as one of 10 anti-science sites.
    Skeptoid had taken pains to state that said sites were on the list because of their anti-science stance.
    No answers from Skeptoid once again.
    That’s a shame, because now that Skeptoid can say anything it likes virtually unchallenged in the manner it was before, then it becomes even more of a site for outlandish definitions of what CT’s are, their proponents, and the total endorsement of the Official Story no matter what.

    It’s a shame because in many other articles, Skeptoid posts sensible and well-thought comments, and I agree with most of them.

    But not for 9-11 and TWA800, and a few other important subjects which one way or the other affect us all around the world, and will continue to do so for a long time.

  51. Macky says:


    “Have you ever read anything that debunks the 911 and JFK conspiracy claims?”

    Yes I have, 911myths for a start. 911myths is factually wrong in at least two important items to the Flight 77 story, one of which was reflected in Myth #4 of Brian’s Pentagon Missile article, something I explained early on in the thread, but which Skeptoid ignored.

    Convoluted reasoning doesn’t alter the fact that plain official evidence was put forward by way of citations to Skeptoid, who ignored them also.

    I am sorry for the classrooms and individual students who will inspect Skeptoid later on, in order to learn, and mostly they probably will, but on 9-11 (and TWA800 and a few other subjects), young people will be brought up to believe in a US govt story that was never proven (i.e. who the terrorists were, if any) and to have confidence in a site that promotes pseudo-history when solid evidence to the contrary is presented, by US govt own agency files.

    • MBDK says:

      Macky, this is exactly why you are considered whacky.
      This, as well as many other, clear pieces of evidence prove conclusively that it was a plane, not a missile that struck the pentagon. Of course, I suspect you will deny it and EXPAND your conspiracy to include such things as planted evidence, which of course would include not only those who planted it, but all the witnesses available that might have seen it. And WHY would they remain silent? Well, big brave Mackey will respond – “because of threats to their lives and those of their families.” However, Mackey, being the super-righteous person he is, has no problem poo-pooing any consequences HE might suffer at the hands of the all-powerful illuminati. NONE of the men and women who’s actual lives are on the line in their EVERYDAY performance of duty have the cahoneys that Mackey does.
      Mackey, you have issues. We ALL have issues. It is just that you, for whatever reason, cannot seem to resolve the obvious, no matter how succinctly it is presented to you. Your pseudoscience SHOULD NOT be ignored, rather presented as a lesson for all on how to be a closed-minded fanatic.
      And just to put things in a very poignant perspective, let me point out what the MAJOR and most TELLING difference between “official” versions of 9/11 and “truthers” versions is: When push comes to shove, the official versions give reputable references for their conclusions. The “truthers” always name “other studies”, but give no verifiable reference that correlates to their conclusion(s). Who’s zoomin’ who?

    • Bill Morgan says:


      Governments really do lie, cover-up crimes and put out false information. It’s called PROPAGANDA!! All governments lie, yes even the US Government. Shocking, yes!

      (8) The CIA admits that it hired Iranians in the 1950′s to pose as Communists and stage bombings in Iran in order to turn the country against its democratically-elected prime minister.

      (17) The NSA admits that it lied about what really happened in the Gulf of Tonkin incident in 1964 … manipulating data to make it look like North Vietnamese boats fired on a U.S. ship so as to create a false justification for the Vietnam war.

      (31) The U.S. falsely blamed Iraq for playing a role in the 9/11 attacks – as shown by a memo from the defense secretary – as one of the main justifications for launching the Iraq war. Even after the 9/11 Commission admitted that there was no connection, Dick Cheney said that the evidence is “overwhelming” that al Qaeda had a relationship with Saddam Hussein’s regime, that Cheney “probably” had information unavailable to the Commission, and that the media was not ‘doing their homework’ in reporting such ties. Top U.S. government officials now admit that the Iraq war was really launched for oil … not 9/11 or weapons of mass destruction. Despite previous “lone wolf” claims, many U.S. government officials now say that 9/11 was state-sponsored terror; but Iraq was not the state which backed the hijackers. The key point is that the U.S. falsely blamed it on Iraq, when it knew Iraq had nothing to do with it.

      • MBDK says:

        So? The complicity of the USA in the reign of the Shah of Iran is no secret. And what you call an “elected” leader is true, but only in the most lenient of definitions. Even Saddam got 100% of the votes in Iraq.
        The article concerning Vietnam gets its information from someone’s INTERPRETATION of the declassified documents. The NSA admitted nothing of the kind. Also, the article admits that North Vietnam had previously fired upon a different US destroyer. Regardless, neither event was a direct cause for the eventual war…er…”police action”.
        And a quick look at the 9/11 diatribe quickly reveals sources that contradict one another, make patently false claims, etc. It was so absurd in it’s fervor to spread its own biased message, that it seemed like reading a mass-murderer’s manifesto.
        I am sorry, but since those are the sort of places you go for your “news” and “facts”, it’s no wonder your head is filled with misinformation.
        Yes governments lie, they ALL do, but they also go through leadership and policy changes, and eventually get busted when their immoral actions are brought to light. But speculation, conjecture and bad science do not and cannot refute the truth. And so far, despite your contorted beliefs there is no compelling evidence to support a 9/11 pre-planned conspiracy by the US government.
        Please feel free to not reply to me, as I don’t care to argue this with someone as gullible as you, anymore.

        • Bill Morgan says:

          And I don’t choose to argue with someone who is so gullible as to believe the government tells us the Truth in published government reports. The CIA, FBI, NSA, DIA, etc. put out false cover stories all the time. How can you be so gullible as to believe anything the Intelligence Agencies say? They train their people in how to lie.

  52. Macky says:


    Your post illustrates exactly what I mean when I talk about so-called skeptics resorting to conspiracy bashing and ad hominem attacks instead of actually examining the evidence against the official story of 9-11 and Fl77 in particular.

    For a start, if you had read any of the hundreds of posts on the Pentagon Missile thread, you would readily see that I had never asserted that the Pentagon was hit by anything other than an aircraft of some sort. You would also notice that I took pains to explain that I was not promoting any conspiracy theory at all, merely poking wacking great holes in the Official Story of the US govt using their own files against them.

    There is no proof that it was Fl77 except for what the US govt tells you, but even if it was Fl77, the US govt story begins to unravel when the story of the alleged perpetrators and who sent them is examined.

    We are told that Fl77 was hijacked by Islamic terrorists, that a Hani Hanjour took over the controls, and the rest of the hijackers somehow managed to control the passengers/crew with box cutters, and then Hanjour drove the aircraft from 300 miles out and performed a high-speed descending turn that Dulles ATC’s thought was a military aircraft, a fighter in fact by the way it was being flown, roared in at 530 mph and hit the Pentagon at near ground level, the very first time he was ever on a B757 flight deck.

    In fact there is no proof that Hanjour was even on Fl77, and no proof that Fl77 ever took off that day. There is also no proof of any Islamic terrorist involvement, and EVERYTHING you think you know about Fl77 et al comes directly from the US govt, THAT IS ALL.

    Right up to date, BTS records show Fl77 never having taken off on 9-11. Look it up if you don’t believe me.
    In fact none of the 19 alleged hijackers were ever identified. Here’s the FBI file
    Osama Bin laden was never indicted for 9-11 Here’s the FBI file

    Barbara Olson’s alleged phone calls to her husband, which contributed greatly to the Fl77 US govt story proven never to have happened. Here’s the FBI file/court evidence at the Moussaoui trial

    While you’re at it, you might like to have a look at a couple of the Flight 93 phone calls and try and explain how they lasted for over an hour after Fl93 was supposed to have crashed, not to mention ACARS records elsewhere showing Fl93 in the air after crash time as well.

    Care to explain how Hanjour was even on the flight when his name replaced another “terrorist” a day or so later after the FBI were so quick to name the 19, allegedly on a list found in Atta’s luggage which strangely managed to change itself four times in the following days ?

    That’s what skeptics should be doing, examining US govt evidence, not slinging off at those who don’t agree with the Official Story.

  53. Macky says:

    Well MBDK, I posted some sensible answers to your somewhat hysterical ad hominem attack on me, complete with some citations that reinforced my skepticism of the Official Story of Fl77 of 9-11.

    That post was almost immediately deleted, so it appears that the filtering of information that directly contradicts the Skeptoid-supported urban legend of Fl77, and the promotion of unscientific pseudo-history has begun, because that information was allowed to stay up on Skeptoid (unanswered though it may have been) for at least 18 months after I posted it on the old forum.

    If that indeed is the case, then Skeptoid is now encouraging everything against what it allegedly stands for i.e. the promotion of critical analysis and solid science.

    The alleged terrorists (if they ever existed at all) were never scientifically identified (DNA), the question of how an alleged list managed to change itself at least 4 times, of the 19 names that were supposed to have been found in Atta’s luggage was never addressed (critical analysis), and the technologically-derived evidence that the FBI presented at the Moussaoui trial (i.e. Barbara Olson phone calls, Zero seconds) was also ignored.

    That was the second post of mine that has been deleted so far this early, and it is indicative of a selective filtering of information that does not support the US govt Urban Myth of Flight 77,s alleged perpetrators. I posted clear FBI files in my last post to back my skepticism, not nonsense such as your post attacking me.
    Your post has been left up while mine was deleted.
    It may be surprising to you MBDK that Brian has encouraged me at least three times (once by personal email) to continue posting.
    Either that’s all off now, or he needs to remind his moderators.

    • Bill Morgan says:

      Macky, Don’t waste your time with people like MBDK. He or she is probably an intelligence operative working in a basement wing at CIA or NSA and gets paid to attack people who contradict the Official Government version of events on web site postings. Same for many Skeptic organizations like Michael Shermer’s Skeptics Society. According to Michael, there were no Conspiracies in JFK, RFK, MLK, 9/11, Pearl Harbor, Gulf of Tonken, etc. and etc. Presidents like LBJ never murdered anyone (real number is in excess of 20). Bill and Hillary never had anyone murdered (real number is in excess of 50). Save your time. The discussions will go no where. Bill

  54. Macky says:

    Just a quick post to Skeptoid. While awaiting moderation, my posts are repeatedly disappearing and then appearing again over several hours. The overnight (NZ) disappearance of my second to last post and its continued absence this early morning prompted my last post.
    There seems to something wrong in the works there.

  55. Macky says:

    Thank you for your thoughtful comments Bill. They are certainly true to date, as my 3.5 years of posting to Skeptoid has proven.

    The reasons why I keep on posting is not to try and convince blinkered “skeptics” that the Official Story of events such as Fl77 of 9-11 have no evidence for them re who the perps were, and plenty of evidence against it.

    But because if even one or two readers who call into Skeptoid in order to “learn” suddenly realize that what I say has some validity and then start using Skeptoid’s own mandate, critical analysis to try and sift the real truth of what happened, then my efforts will have been worthwhile, I feel.

    In response to those such as MBDK, it should be noted that my skepticism of the Official Story of Flight 77 allows for not only an aircraft to impact the Pentagon, but also that it indeed was Fl77, even if there is no evidence for it (publicly).

    The citations I have provided (there’s more) clearly show that the alleged terrorists on Fl77, in particular Hani Hanjour the alleged pilot, were not only NOT identified scientifically (DNA), but not even proven to be on the flight.
    That’s a flight btw that BTS shows to this very day never took place.

    I also demonstrate in my last posts that ANY passenger list showing Hani Hanjour on it MUST be altered, by simple critical analysis re the alleged “full list of terrorists’ names” allegedly found by the FBI in Atta’s luggage after somehow transferring itself from a car parked nearby the airport, along with a Koran of course.

    Said jumping-jack list named a Mosear Caned who miraculously changed to a Hani Hanjour some time later on. It also named someone who had died exactly one year previous, and his “brother” who turned up alive in Florida.
    “Skeptics” of course will ignore all this as the rantings of “conspiracy nutters”. It is significant that it is THEY who believe in an unevidenced and clearly fabricated US govt story, a conspiracy theory in fact, when so-called CT nutters provide so much evidence against it.

    Who are the real skeptics ?

    I have also mentioned that if any “skeptic” can provide evidence or a critically sound argument that is better than the evidence/arguments I’ve provided, then I will acknowledge that and change my stance, and certainly post it on Skeptoid for all to see.

    • Bill Morgan says:

      Macky, I know this is 3 hours long, but Barbara Honegger gives convincing proof that a commercial airliner like Flight 77 did not hit the Pentagon. I have watched the entire 3 hours. I have a close friend who is a close friend of Barbara Honegger and she tells me Honegger’s research is solid science. Available on You Tube at this link.

      Behind the Smoke Curtain – The 9/11 Pentagon Attack – Barbara Honegger

      I’m also convinced that many (not all) big name Skeptics are working for one of the intelligence
      agencies! It’s a very good paying job!


      • Macky says:

        Thanks Bill,

        I will consider solid evidence for and against other evidences put forward by the US govt, and let’s be under no illusion here, EVERYTHING about who the perpetrators of 9-11 were has come from the US govt. But along with other US govt-withheld evidences such as the Pentagon cams that showed the fly-in, there comes a time when arguments for or against the Official Story become merely an endless tirade of opposing views, each with its own set of evidences that support that particular assertion.

        I have no doubt that some youtubes show genuine parts of the true story, but they themselves become the focus of further arguments based on their authenticity etc, and who saw what and who didn’t.

        Case in point, the film re TWA800. That’s why I don’t use said film to support my view (and evidence) that the investigation of TWA800 was completely botched. There are so many other ways to prove that without films and videos, youtubes etc.

        The twin towers is another example of an endless argument as to what brought them down. It’s pointless, because there should no doubt in anyone’s mind that they certainly did fall, and that the death and destruction on that awful day was genuine. All the different versions of what brought those towers down have their engineers, their “witnesses” their architects supporting any and all versions. So what is the point of laymen arguing about all that ?

        But the reason for all the continuing war in the middle east and the huge death toll was primarily because of those NAMED BUT NEVER IDENTIFIED AS THE PERPETRATORS OF 9-11.

        Those alleged 19, the outfit that allegedly sent them, and the head sherang WERE NEVER PROVEN TO HAVE PLANNED AND CARRIED OUT 9-11, except by a US govt-originated “official” story that has been proven flawed by it’s own US govt evidence, and by solid critical analysis as advocated (but not supported) by Skeptoid, pipelined through the corporate-owned/US govt-controlled media and delivered over and over again to a shocked nation and world until all reason has gone and the alleged culprits fed to an angry and grieving population are taken as the truth, when in fact they were never identified. There were no bodies, no official recording at the entry gates of Fl77, the Barbara Olson “phone calls’ to her husband were proven by FBI’s own evidence never to have happened, Hanjour was not even proven to be anywhere near Fl77 on that day THAT BTS RECORDS SHOW AS NEVER TAKING OFF.

        Dulles ATC Obrien’s interview was misrepresented by Skeptoid and by 911myths, a fact easily verified by simply reading the interview again properly.

        Even the “missile theory” of the Pentagon hit has been nothing but a diversion to keep researchers occupied, and it is entirely apparent that the distinct possibility of which you outline, Bill, is alive and well today, the setting up of “skeptic” sites under the banner of science and “learning” (admittedly with some authentic examples to provide a cover of genuine scientific truths/stories) in order to obfuscate and misrepresent evidence of events that have changed the world, and provoked yet more war and bloodshed on the backs of the ordinary citizens of all countries, who are used by their PTB’s as cannon fodder in combat, “acceptable” casualties in foreign policy, and disposable labour in peacetime, their jobs taken from them and given to cheaper labour in other countries, blatant treason in any man’s language.

        Whether Skeptoid is one of those sites I don’t know. If so, then Brian was certainly generous in leaving the bulk of hundreds of my posts up before the general shut-down of all articles to public comments. And Skeptoid has on occasion provided pertinent arguments to many other issues, many I agree with.
        Unfortunately, that so-called skeptics still believe in a US-govt concocted story of a bunch of scruffy “Islamic terrorists” managing to keep the “Fl77” passengers at bay with a few box-cutters while another equally scruffy and utterly incompetent pilot allegedly took over flying the B757 the very first time he was ever on its flight-deck (after being refused only weeks before a solo flight because he was thought incapable of controlling a light plane), then 40 minutes in the air without a single air force fighter interception while other crashes were being reported, shows just how willing even normally intelligent people are, to accept what is nothing but an American urban myth, another example of pseudo-history that has no evidence for it.

        I am somewhat disappointed that Skeptoid may be a learning destination by classrooms and young people, not of many of its other subjects and articles that are perfectly sensible and sound, but of one or two American US govt versions of history that have been used to incite hatred and war among otherwise peaceful citizens on both “sides”, by an entity that changes by the “election” at face value, but underneath and behind the US govt remains solidly committed to world domination, even at the expense of its own citizens who have been stripped of their civil rights post-911, shocked and abused by their “own” secret services in illegal experiments (MKULTRA etc), betrayed by their own president when he called for bi-partisan support for amnesty for illegal immigrants, had their jobs taken from them and given to sweat-shop labour in China, India, or Mexico, and then called to engage and support a “War On Terror” on the back of unidentified alleged terrorists of a flight that is recorded to date by another US govt agency as never occurring.

        If that’s the sort of world that parents want their children to be brought up in, then I have no confidence for the average citizens in our countries in any kind of secure and safe future.

        • Bill Morgan says:


          I agree with what you have said in your post. We are faced with those in a Moneyed Power Elite who are driving the world towards a World Government. Billionaire Bankers have been pushing for a World Government for over a 100 plus years going all the way back to Cecil Rhodes. The front groups for the Billionaire Bankers include:

          The Royal Institute for International Affairs in London.
          The Council on Foreign Relations in New York.
          The Bilderberg Group
          The Trilateral Commission in Washington

          On February 17, 1950, James Paul Warburg confidently declared to the United States Senate: “We shall have World Government, whether or not we like it. The only question is whether World Government will be achieved by conquest or consent.”

          In 1991 David Rockefeller said at the Trilateral Commission conference:
          “We are grateful to The Washington Post, The New York Times, Time Magazine and other great publications whose directors have attended our meetings and respected their promises of discretion for almost forty years. It would have been impossible for us to develop our plan for the world if we had been subject to the bright lights of publicity during those years. But, the work is now much more sophisticated and prepared to march towards a World Government. The supranational sovereignty of an intellectual elite and world bankers is surely preferable to the national auto-determination practiced in past centuries.”

          The Billionaire Bankers own our Government and many other Governments. The Politicians are only front men Puppets controlled by the Banking Puppet Masters. Rothschilds, Rockefellers, Warburgs, Morgans, etc. are just a few of the PTB operating behind the scenes as a Shadow Government. Unfortunately, most people still don’t want to believe this.

          My take on some (not all) of the Skeptic web sites is that they are paid front men for the same Power Elite. Their mission is to attempt to debunk anyone who contradicts the official government version of national events by labeling them conspiracy theorists.


          • Macky says:

            All true, Bill.

            Our govts are in fact representatives of one and the same PTB, prominent members of the “royal” families, and corporate heads entering govt office and then returning to their “day jobs” on a revolving door process after their terms of office, the cheering multitudes in the meantime waving their flags and shouting with joy at the latest vague speeches of a “better world for our children” etc from some mouthpiece like Obama NBC, at the latest national rave-up called elections, facades of “freedom and democracy” that ultimately mean absolutely nothing, as the world slides ever-nearer to a global totalitarian state, and the average citizen becomes once again serf-status, as in the days of old.

            Every war is essentially a banker’s war, the whole money system nothing but a giant con on those who actually work and produce the goods that said money was supposed to represent, but now nothing but a giant paper mountain, as the huge FOREX market demonstrates, and those of the FedRes print yet another billion dollars out of thin air, said FedRes outside of any peoples’ democratic control for the last hundred years.
            Not to mention the European Commission who have effectively demolished European country borders and who tell said “countries’ when to have elections and when not to, proving once again that money renders the old concept of “America” or “England” as separate countries nothing but a convenience to be used to rally the people when the PTB deem it necessary to stage another war.

            Every war is a jack-up, shocking “incidents” either created or encouraged (as Roosevelt’s Pearl Harbor) in order to make up the cannon-fodder for war, which of course will make the PTB that much richer and their power entrenched, and which the PTB support both sides, as in WW2, winners no matter which side prevailed.

            The evidence of all of the above is mainstream, easily examined by anyone who can google, and it is notable on sites such as Skeptoid that the biggest attackers of “conspiracy nutters” etc SEEM to be younger persons probably around their 20’s-30’s, who have been brought up with a TV screen in front of them since birth, thoroughly programmed with Official Stories and corporate versions of the “truth”.

            TV has been extremely effective in brainwashing many who regard themselves as intelligent skeptics by repeated broadcasts of the Official Story of 9-11 and Fl77, buildings showing again and again being hit by an aircraft of some sort, but announcing that it was Fl175, hijacked by Islamic terrorists, sent by Al Qaeda, headed by Osama Bin Laden etc.
            So every time that “skeptics” see/saw said aircraft crashing into the tower on TV, a US govt story was more firmly imprinted in their minds, as in the Pentagon crash, but with no evidence for it whatsoever, the crashes in all cases obliterating any evidence of the “19”, who were never identified except by implication and US govt story in the first place.

            To cement the US Govt story in normally intelligent persons’ minds, over the years various pieces of “evidence” are served up by the govt/corporate media such as a bandana in near-pristine condition allegedly worn by one of Fl93’s “terrorists”, despite no explanation of how such a bandana would survive in such good condition, a crash where allegedly everyone had to be identified by DNA analysis.
            Another example was Bin Laden’s youtube “confession” completely contradicted by the FBI file on the same man that I posted on Skeptoid. Who do you believe ? The media Official Story, or the US govt file that says the opposite ?

            And that’s exactly what many “skeptics” do not seem to able to grasp, due to the constant battering on their minds by said media, of the US govt Official Story which has no evidence for it, except from the US govt.

            By critical analysis, the US govt Official Story of 9-11 does not prove that the named perps were even on Fl77, never mind carrying out a hijacking and deliberately crashing the plane into the Pentagon, said Official Story ending up being nothing but a belief that the US govt has told the truth, or not.

            Belief is not critical analysis , nor is the constant repetition of a story necessarily the truth.

            What thousands of witnesses saw were aircraft hitting buildings, nothing more as far as who caused it. All the rest comes directly from the US govt, “evidenced” by a story which changed several times, was contradicted by its own agency files, and was unsupported by any proof, identification etc, outside the US govt.
            Those who support the Official Story of Flight 77 only BELIEVE that the perpetrators were as the US govt said. Critical analysis it is not.

  56. Kevin says:

    Was deletion of verbatim reproduced below comment (inclusive of ‘awaiting moderation’ and time stamp) just an accident? With no nasty censorship intended? Let’s see. Here goes for a second attempt:

    Kevin says:
    Your comment is awaiting moderation.
    December 28, 2015 at 1:35 am

    It’s one thing to unilaterally withdraw article comments as a feature from a given point onwards, but quite another to go back and deliberately expunge an already existing vast collection of such. That move just smells real bad. Such a reminder of Orwell’s 1984. So skeptoid aka Brian Dunning chooses to follow the Ministry of Truth model. How nicely ironic. Those who control the past….

  57. Bill Morgan says:

    Macky, You and I are on the same page. All of this was outlined in War is a Racket by General Smedley Butler in 1935. Book reprinted in 2003. Nothing has changed much. The Billionaire Bankers own our Government and other Governments. “Over time, whoever controls the money system, controls the nation.” Stephen Zarlenga author of The Lost Science of Money. “Give me control of a nation’s money and I care not who makes it’s laws” — Mayer Amschel Bauer Rothschild We are a nation of the special interests, by the special interests and for the special interests. Bill

  58. Macky says:

    Very true Bill. I have only heard of Smedley Butler a few years ago, having arrived at my beliefs/knowledge/research by overall observations of NZ’s corporatization of govt departments and the selling off of same in the last 30 years. Effectively removing any voting (democracy) and social responsibility from a large sector of the overall management of the country, and placing it in the private hands of major company shareholders, the abolishing of the effectiveness of the balance of Unions, and the exposure of NZ’s workforce to dollar-a-day labour in the Far East, with subsequent loss of jobs and in some cases, near life-long careers.

    I suspect that most of Skeptoid’s Official story supporters are too young to have seen much of the same thing happening in the US, Brian himself being born about the same time I was already in the Naval reserve, ready to “fight for my country and freedom” little realizing in the mid-60’s that the concept of separate “countries” was rapidly being undermined (as it steadily has been all through at least the 20th century) by corporate/military/prominent family interests that are and were essentially global, with various “enemies” served up as rallying points for naïve young people to provide cannon-fodder and huge profits for The Few.

    Case in point, the Vietnam War, an enormous money-maker whose cost in human suffering is incalculable, and ongoing even today.

    What became even more apparent was that these PTB, some of them such as Kissinger (born Heinz btw) didn’t give one monkey’s about how many deaths are/were caused by their decisions and machinations, and effectively remain war criminals who have never faced their “Nurembergs” and probably never will.

    It is somewhat unsettling that our world is run by sociopaths and psychopaths but that is what they are, jacking the latest bloody war or stripping their “own” citizens of their jobs in order to gain even more profit and most importantly, power.

    Is it any wonder that the more extreme CT’s assert that these unfeeling excuses for human beings are not in fact human at all, hybrid Grays and Reptoids just two named examples of their theories.

    With no solid evidence of that, the so-called skeptics wade in with their derision and contempt for the CT’s, some of whom may themselves be plants by the PTB in order to spread outlandish stories with no “scientific” proof.

    It is interesting that much of what is proposed today as evidence for the manipulations of the industrial/military/bankers complex was identified and exposed 80 years ago by a career soldier.

    The voluntary signing up currently of thousands of career servicemen in modern times to fight yet more jacked-up wars in the Middle East against the latest enemy demonstrates how effective the so-called free-world media has been in continuing to pull the wool over our eyes, using the ordinary citizens of all our countries that do not want war, but whose only desire is to live peaceful family lives. On the “opposite side” those radical clerics who encourage their equally brainwashed young men to bomb innocent citizens carry the blood of thousands on their religious/power-hungry hands, just as the political leaders and their banker-backers in that great country America, bastion of freedom and democracy, but the promoter of fascism and eugenics that the Nazis’ learned from and took to such extremes, today becoming more overtly what it always was, at least from the beginnings of the 20th century.

  59. Macky says:

    Meanwhile we have here all these “skeptics” who endorse the Official US Govt Story of 9-11, inasmuch who the perpetrators were, without a shred of proof of said story.

    Worse still, when solid US Govt Official Files are presented that directly contradict the Official 9-11 Story, the so-called skeptics simply ignore them, without comment one way or the other.

    Then there is also no coherent arguments from said skeptics when it is pointed out that right at the very start the Official Story as pipelined directly from the US govt changed several times, most notably off a list that was “found” almost immediately after the attacks, where at least four originally named “terrorists” were replaced with another four, one of whom was supposed to be the pilot of Fl77.

    There is never any discussion with the skeptics as to how come with the stunning “successes” of allegedly four teams of scruffy middle-eastern men in penetrating the entire USAF, NORAD, etc defences on that day, there has never been any further attempts of the same nature, not even a series of light planes loaded with explosives directed at targets by suicide pilots that don’t have the problem of having to “overcome” the pilots and passengers.

    What of Barbara Olson’s phone calls, proven by FBI evidence never to have taken place ? Hanjour’s incompetence, proven by FBI evidence ? BTS records clearly showing Fl77 never taking off that day ?
    The alleged terrorists themselves never identified ? Bin Laden never indicted for 9-11 ?

    Where are all the true skeptics ? Where’s the critical analysis that Skeptoid prides itself on ?

    • Noah Dillon says:

      “Without a shred of proof” is only accurate inasmuch as you ignore all the collected and published evidence.

      • MBDKMacky says:

        Noah, I may not be telling you anything you do not already know, but for at least any lurkers, here goes. Macky is a delusional entity. In a previous post Macky didn’t even recognize that my reference (re: the Barbara Olson call) which showed that the phone call was NOT claimed to have been from her cell phone (rather most likely an airline phone), included the same EXACT evidence Macky said showed the opposite (obviously untrue). To a person that shows such inability to comprehend the very evidence they themselves provide, I find it a waste of my time to try to point out the obvious, let alone a more complex series of events. I will no longer reply to Macky until that person shows a distinct improvement in their ability to perform any legitimate critical thinking.

      • Macky says:

        Collected and published evidence of what Noah ?

        Where is the evidence that the published alleged terrorists were those named, especially the alleged pilot of Fl77 ? The 9-11 Commission is full of holes re Hanjour in its Chapter 7, and is only a repeat of the US Govt Official Story of 9-11 that had been beaten into the public’s consciousness quite some time beforehand.

        The Commission story is the US govt story. Why ? Because everything was vetted by the White House before it was allowed out in the public domain. In fact, Brian himself admitted that he had not read it before he posted his four articles re aspects of 9-11, (the Fl93 article one of the fairest I’ve seen on 9-11 by anyone BTW, just as a balance to my criticisms).

        So where is the evidence that the five alleged terrorists (that have gone down in history forever it seems) were as released by the FBI who only believed that they were the ones, and further investigation was in progress, as per the FBI file I’ve posted the link to, and which nobody will discuss ?

        Have you even read it, Noah ? What do you make of BTS records that clearly state to this day that Fl77 never took place on 9-11 ?

        That Hanjour was never proven to be on a flight that officially never existed ?

        • Noah Dillon says:

          Well, the commission report, for one. There may be gaps, or you might not believe the evidence, but that doesn’t mean there’s no evidence. We’ve gone over this repeatedly. By “beaten into the public’s consciousness” do you mean “made public during the investigation, like what happens with basically every criminal or government investigation”?

          I don’t know what link you’re referring to, but yeah, fine, I’ll read it. This is why there are no more comments at Skeptoid, though, you realize: you’re ranting about 9/11 conspiracies on a post that has nothing to do with any of that, and as far as I’ve ever seen, reading every piece of conspiracy nonsense that comes my way, there’s no evidence of a conspiracy. So you’re hijacking an unrelated blog post as a mouthpiece for pseudoscience.

          Here’s some links for you. They’ll probably answer some of your concerns, if you’re open to that:

          • Macky says:

            MBDK doesn’t seem to have actually inspected the FBI evidence link which details the alleged Barbara Olson phone call as zero seconds. There is also no reference whatsoever on said file that Olson made any other phone call(s) on air phones, so whatever MBDK is on about, I do not know. I’ll post the link again.

            Noah, your two links return 404’s so I wasn’t able to inspect them sorry.

            And I’ll say it one more time in answer to your assertions, I AM NOT PROMOTING ANY 9-11 CONSPIRACY, NOR HAVE I EVER. I am tearing apart a US Govt Official Story of Fl77 that has no evidence for it re who the alleged terrorists were.

            Clear now ?

            I’ve just told you the 9-11 Commission report was only the US Govt story and told you why. And it’s not a case of whether I believe it or not, there are conflicting accounts of Hanjour’s training etc that are also NOT gaps, but anomalies that become a bit clearer when one reads the FBI files that were presented as evidence at the Moussaoui trial years later. Hanjour simply didn’t belong in the air, not even as a light aircraft pilot, and the Commission report reflects that in Chapter 7. If you read it.
            It’s also not a question of pseudoscience at all, and I don’t know why you continue to present those throwaway remarks into your responses.

            Had a look at the files I’ve posted re the alleged hijacker ID’s, Bin laden, and BTS yet ?

          • Daniel Morrow says:

            You guys need to stop. This micro thread is the case and point of removing comments. Do you realize that the last 15 posts I have recived in my inbox are smothered in irony?

            It’s not that people want to silence you for the “truth.” It’s because you ruined the party.

          • Noah Dillon says:

            Yep. You’re right. I’m done. Thanks for the wake-up call.

  60. Some enterprising person could start a separate blog for comments to Skeptoid. That would allow those who wish to comment a place to do it while relieving Brian of an annoying and thankless task.

    • Bill Morgan says:

      Yes, a Blog on Debunking the Debunkers. We need that for the Truth to prevail. Governments lie to the people and we need an objective truth movement to survive since the Skeptics work so hard at debunking the truth. But then again, they just serve the people who give them a paycheck. Always follow the paycheck to see where a person’s loyalties lies. It lies with those who feed them.

    • Macky says:

      Skeptoid HAD the facility for comments, and it also had the right and ability to remove them as it saw fit.

      The problem with Skeptoid and its “skeptics” has always been primarily one of the confusion with arguments/debates on pure science/pseudo-science, and with plain evidence of happenings/human events.

      That’s why Skeptoid was unable to answer my repeated question as to why was on Skeptoid’s list of top 10 anti-science sites.

      I have always applauded Skeptoid for science-based clarifications and debunking of pseudo-science even if I did not agree of some specific points and subjects.

      But the spectre of classrooms and other young people coming to Skeptoid to learn appalls me, not for Skeptoid’s solid science features and information (which anyway could be gained in any library), but its promotion of American pseudo-history which has been the impetus and excuses for war which millions of people have died, along with Skeptoids diminishing of the serious nature of long-time abuses of American citizens in MKUltra etc.

      You “skeptics” on Skeptoid that support said pseudo-history, carry the responsibility of false messages that young people will accept as truth an unevidenced US Govt conspiracy theory of its own for the rest of their lives, and the excuse for the deaths of hundreds of thousands of innocent citizens of other countries who had nothing to do with any war or any plot.

      The USA has been the most warlike country in the world since WW2, but it is not the ordinary citizens that have been to blame. Nevertheless so-called skeptics pile in whenever anybody presents evidence to the contrary of an Official Story put out by a corporate/military US govt that has world domination as its long-term plans, ruled by psychopaths like Kissinger from behind (unelected by the people) and jacking up wars through its drug-dealing murderous thugs called the CIA (and others).

      I would never have bothered to begin posting again on here until I saw Brian’s comments “This misinformation typically far exceeds the word count of our articles; for our articles presenting a reasoned analysis of 9/11 events, there was as much as 75 times as much content on the page promoting absurd conspiracy theories. We no longer choose to promote this nonsense alongside our hard work.”

      What rubbish. There were no absurd conspiracy theories that I can remember on any of the four Skeptoid articles on aspects of 9-11, and Skeptoid has repeatedly failed to answer the evidences which I have brought by way of its own previous invitation to DISCUSS. I pointed out to Skeptoid on several occasions where its reasoning was wrong, posting evidence to support same. That was done in the spirit of Truth, not carping criticism.

      The reason why it’s so serious is not because all the hullaballoo over trivial subjects that we can let drop as being of no lasting importance.

      9-11 defined the American 21st century, and that of the whole world, and to continue to front and support a so-called skeptical site under the banner of science and critical analysis (notable by its absence on Skeptoid), which young people will be mis-informed on events which had no proof for them, and which “caused war” is a deliberate distortion of historical truth which they will carry for the rest of their lives.

      That’s plain wrong.

      • Bill Morgan says:

        Macky, Right on Target Brother! We share the same reality. All we get from the Government is lies, lies and more dam lies. Lying politicians only know lying as a way of life. God forbid if any of them ever tell us the Truth. Many of the Skeptics are on the CIA, NSA, DIA, ATF, etc. payrolls. They know who butters their bread. Always follow the paycheck. That tells you a lot about who the front men are.

        • Macky says:

          You’re right Bill. With anything of a controversial nature such as 9-11, follow the money, who benefits from a war e.g. and/or who assumes even greater power.

          If indeed your assertion (never denied to date by any “skeptic”) is correct, that many of them are on the payroll of said power-structure agencies in order to promote and encourage mis-information and distorted history that blames a group of persons who were never identified by science, then not only is the responsibility of continuing pseudo-history on their shoulders.

          By deliberately and knowingly obfuscating facts and evidence that proves that the alleged perps were NOT those that were used as the excuses for invasion and war, then the deaths of hundreds of thousands of innocent citizens (including those of their Home country) are squarely on their heads as surely as if they were the ones that pulled the trigger, or dropped the bombs on the wedding parties and funerals.

          Along with the war-mongers, their payroll is blood-money, nothing less.

        • MBDK says:

          Bill, it would be better for the world if you and Macky got your OWN blog going. THEN you would see who wants to read your ignorant opines. But, I know you won’t as you couldn’t handle the truth of only you and your boyfriend (and your associated sock-puppets) being the only posters. Your insignificance would be too sobering for you two to take.

          • Macky says:

            Nothing to say except personal attacks MBDK ?

            No answers to any of the evidence presented ? US Govt official evidence, that is ?

            It’s easy to insult people when you’ve nothing else to offer except slavish adherence to Authority no matter what the evidence says.

            It may interest you to know MBDK that I post my responses to SOME of Brian’s unfounded comments IN ORDER TO IMPROVE SKEPTOID and its mandate CRITICAL ANALYSIS.

            If Skeptoid was just another so-called skeptical site but in reality nothing but filled 100% with derision and debunking without anything intelligent to offer, I wouldn’t waste my time.

            But Skeptoid is largely filled with solid information and mostly sound opinion, with accomplished thinkers such as Alison etc contributing with some decent articles that I complimented on the old Skeptoid.

            Unfortunately, people like you MBDK that continue to provide no answers to questions that may stretch your beliefs, and require you to use your intelligence, instead responding with nothing but insulting abuse, are actually doing Skeptoid a gross disservice.

            Think about that the next time you decide to post.

      • asydhouse says:

        If your government could so callously destroy the twin towers, causing the death of thousands of people and putting the entire city of New York under risk of ill health from the chemicals etc released during that catastrophe, why haven’t they arranged a few fatal accidents for the noisy people who continue to post your versions of events?

        Seriously, you guys would all be dead years ago if you were right and they were trying to cover something up.

        Far easier to believe that Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld and the other war criminals in the neo-con administration, a small cadre of arrogant and short-sighted assholes, opportunistically used that sad day as an excuse to invade Iraq for the oil and geo-political positioning, the old story repeated all over the globe by hypocritical ideologues in American governments down through the years.

        But according to you, thousands of dedicated professionals have sold out their integrity to support that ugly bunch of pirates who stole the election!

        You are living in a self-righteous fantasy.

        • Macky says:

          That’s a bit of a stretch of your imagination, isn’t it asydhouse ?

          Why should the US govt be worried enough about people like me when so-called skeptics that regard themselves as critical thinkers completely ignore US govt evidence against it’s own Official Story, even in the few last posts ?

          There’s nothing for the PTB to worry about at all. They’ve got the intelligentsia all sorted out, as is perfectly evidenced on Skeptoid over the years, with a few “noisy” people either under personal attacks, their evidence ignored, or diversionary misrepresentations of said “noisy” peoples’ assertions and questions of the US govt Official Story, such as your rather silly sentence “But according to you, thousands of dedicated professionals have sold out their integrity to support that ugly bunch of pirates who stole the election!” something I’ve never asserted whatsoever.

          Have you examined the FBI files links I’ve posted ? Of course you haven’t, otherwise you would be doing what Skeptoid promotes, skeptical analysis .

          “You are living in a self-righteous fantasy.”

          Prove it…

          • asydhouse says:

            You claim never to have said that large numbers of professionals are selling out to cover up a government conspiracy. And yet, for your version to be true, that’s exactly what you are implying.

            The fact that you try this lawyerese “I never said that” stunt shows me that you are not an honest partner in dialogue.

            I don’t need to prove that you are living in a self-righteous fantasy. It’s a conclusion I draw from evidence such as your disingenuous response to my assertion.

            If you were genuinely interested in questioning your government, you would be spending your time attacking the war criminals instead of this song and dance routine which makes you feel like a big fish in the small pond of die-hard conspiracy theorists flogging a dead horse.

            Your self-righteous deprecation of those unwilling to waste time with your special pleading is evidence of your self-righteousness, and the fantasy that hard-working professionals would be willing to sell their souls in support of a cover up on behalf of those war criminals is an obvious and cynical fantasy. It says much about your own moral code that you could entertain the possibility.

          • MBDK says:


          • Bill Morgan says:

            The Snowden documents which appeared in the Guardian, The Washington Post, Der Spiegel and the New York Times, clearly show we have criminals and sycophants in the US Government who will cover up crimes. Same for the WikiLeaks disclosures. You don’t need thousands to be in on a conspiracy. Only a small number of people in important positions of power.

            BTY, I don’t believe in conspiracies. But the evidence we have liars and criminals in positions of power in government is clear. LBJ had his Billy Sol Estes and Bobby Baker scandals. Nixon had his Watergate burglars. Jerry Ford told lies on the Warren Commission. George Bush Sr. had his CIA covert black ops and Mafia connections. Bill Clinton had his drug smuggling operations in Mena, Arkansas. George Bush Jr. had his phony WMD in Iraq that did not exist. Obama has his Benghazi and IRS cover-ups and the list goes on.

        • MBDK says:

          Oh, but you MUST be a government shill! Me, too. Worst paid job in the world, though. Have to deal with deceptive, repetitive, ignorant, angry, intolerant, juvenile, paranoid, and just downright whacky individuals (and their sock puppets) on a regular basis. You get demonized, trash-talked, vulgarized, threatened, and subject to the wildest conjecture imaginable. And the $$$? I’ve been doing this for Over 10 years, and am still waiting for my first cent. As for the results of my posting? You can lead a horse…

          Still, it won’t stop me trying (at my own convenience), at least for the benefit of the lurkers out there.

          • Macky says:


            It’s no good working yourself up into a frenzy. All you have top do is address the evidence that I’ve posted links to for your convenience, and present some decent comments for or against, so that a dialectic/debate then take place, and a consensus of skeptics then hopefully occur.

            That’s what critical analysis is, MBDK, as per Skeptoid’s mandate.
            Noah seems to have bowed out. Why not you try it ?

        • erique says:


          The whole ‘twoofer’ argument goes out the window just due to the fact that NONE of the lunatics denying the obvious have been executed or silenced and their websites taken down. The existence of the ‘twoofer’ websites is actually proof that the all-powerful government isn’t all powerful.

          Why can’t the bozos see that a government, charged by them as being capable of callously killing its own people and businesses, and capable of a highly complex operation could easily ‘disappear’ a few major critics and a handful of websites?

          9/11 ‘truth’ actually debunks itself…

          If Macky and Bill et all are too dumb to see that, I see no point in leading them any further to water; their horses have had enough water to drown in, but are still to dumb to drink it.

          I think, after having my brain explode a few times by reading the ‘reasoning’ of ‘Twoofers’ on the comment sections over the years, Skeptoid is right to remove the facility…reasoning with ‘Twoofers’ is like trying to reason with believers of any other cult…the overwhelming evidence is wholly in favour of the ‘official’ story, all evidence trails have some conflicts, that is why criminal courts have trials, to hear both sides and then adjudicate. Well, the adjudication went in favour of the majority evidence.

          The ‘Twoofers’ ‘reasoning’ would have Adolph Hitler acquitted of mass murder because there is no evidence for him ever killing anyone, ever, and was the first leader in history to actually give animals rights…must have been a good guy.

          They cannot even see the irony of their rants on this blog…lol

          • Bill Morgan says:

            erique, Please go back to your cubicle in the under ground bunker below the CIA headquarters in Langley. We know who you work for and it’s not for the people. Your masters are calling.

          • Macky says:

            erique I am not dealing with the “whole twoofer” argument, and your comments reflect one of Skeptoid’s main agenda’s, which is to deride and debunk conspiracy theories and their proponents, which ends up with the sort of blanket comments that you’ve just posted, and which include myself in amongst CT’s that assert various alternative perpetrators such as the US govt, Zionists etc.

            I have never posted ANY proposed alternative conspiracy theory as to who carried out the 9-11 attacks, only providing evidence that the US govt’s OWN evidence conflicts with its Official Story, and that also by elementary critical analysis the US govt story doesn’t stand up.

            Has it ever occurred to you that security agencies allow such alleged “twoofers” postings etc to stay up as a means of gauging the percentage of public opinion, just as an example ? Just as a possibility ? It is after all an information-gathering regime.

            Or has Brian’s and his writers’ CT-bashing crusade been so successful that it has dulled normally intelligent “skeptics” to behave as though anything against the Official Story engenders the sort of knee-jerk response that your post indicates ?

            Have you examined the files that I sent the links to ? Or are you going to add your name to 21 months of so-called skeptics who have assiduously avoided reading anything which may conflict with what is nothing but their belief system ?

            This is the major problem that has been identified with Brian removing the comments section of his Skeptoid.

            Although I can certainly understand why he did it, his site will simply end up being a showcase for one man’s opinion, with his backers, nothing more.

            Skeptoid under its own mandate of evidenced critical analysis has been proven WRONG on a few, but important issues that have been used to change the world, with the loss of millions of lives collectively.

            Skeptoid has not answered up to those, and continues to maintain a US govt Official Story position which will promote and wrongly teach young people an American pseudo-history which will perpetuate the sort of illegal wars and invasion of countries by the US, and which will certainly result in retaliatory action in increasing intensity unless the psychopaths that run the American industrial/military/banking complex that abuses its own American citizens STOP their OWN terrorism on the world, which has been ongoing since at least 1947.

            erique you said you were “woo-woo” once but now you use your brain to think.

            Prove it by examining those files the links I sent you. There’s a few more I can send if you like.

          • MBDK says:

            “They cannot even see the irony of their rants on this blog…lol”

            Nor much else. I currently refuse to reply directly to Macky, as he has proven himself to be anything but what he claims. I say let him wallow in his own insignificance. But I will counter some ridiculous points in posts to others, such as you, or in general. I do laugh when he says, “Skeptoid under its own mandate of evidenced critical analysis has been proven WRONG “. To quote the princess bride concerning his use of the word “proven”: “You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means.”

          • erique says:

            @MBDK, I’m with you, not only do I not bother to reply to them anymore, I don’t even read their comments -they have NOTHING new to say, just a rehash of other peoples’ old and disproved ‘arguments’, Gish Gallops, circular ‘reasoning’ and face-palming illogical cherry-picking.

            I have better things to do than try and help thirsty horses drink water they are too dumb to find…besides, I’ve upped my pay-grade, I’ll soon be leaving my bunker at Langley; I’ve been moved over from the ‘Dis-Info’ program to the Disclosure Program, after hiding the ‘truth’ for nearly 70 years, our Reptilian overlords think that Earth people are ready for the truth; that they are descended from and ape-hybrid program by ancient astronauts, and Eric von Daniken has been right all along lol

            I think my only failure on 9/11 ‘Operation Twoofer’ was not convincing the brain-dead seekers-of-truth that 9/11 was actually an Illuminati-Reptilian plot, undertaken by Godzilla (who is real by the way) and the Leprechauns. I think my invention of holographic planes was a step too far even for Mad Macky’s Brigade lol

          • mudguts says:

            The more you say erique the chance they seek to rant.

  61. Mudguts says:

    You can take the boy out of adventisism… but you cant take the millerite out of the boy..

  62. MBDK says:

    Some clown posted “That’s a bit of a stretch of your imagination, isn’t it asydhouse ?”

    Funniest unintentional humor I’ve seen in a long time.

    • Macky says:

      Yes but have you actually examined any of the files I’ve posted the links to yet, MBDK.

      Any comments, dialectic, debates in a proper manner in answer to solid US govt agency files that directly contradict its own asserted pseudo-history ?

      If you’ve got anything better, I’ve promised many times to acknowledge same and change my views, plus publicly state that. Anything ?

    • erique says:

      @MBDK, Twoofers, the gift that just keeps giving…these guys should be writing stand-up comedy.

  63. Valkyrie Ziege says:

    ; I believe this is the place where some-one posts a blue-berry pancake recipe.

  64. Kevin says:

    Am I the only one wondering what the hell is going on of late this still active blog? I mean, just why are the comments all out of kilter time-stamp wise? For quite a while, Mudguts comment of January 5, 2016 at 6:26 pm was kept last despite 3 or 4 later postings. Currently, Bill Morgan comment of January 7, 2016 at 4:23 am, is still shown earlier than above Mudguts one. Sheer incompetence, or someone trying to ‘say something’ in a subtle way? Why not just close the thread if that’s the real attitude being strangely expressed presumably by Brian. Can hardly wait to see where this one gets fitted in – maybe half-way down?

    • asydhouse says:

      I can’t be bothered to check your mentioned instances of posts being out of chronological order, but if you click reply to a post, your reply appears underneath that post. The strings of replies with replies to replies indented can get pretty complex, and it’s easy to lose your place and click on an indented reply instead of the earlier less indented post you might have thought you were getting in line below.

      Maybe that’s why your observed inconsistencies have occurred?

      Never ascribe something to a conspiracy when incompetence is a possible explanation!

      • Kevin says:

        Point taken there – being two modes of replying coupled with sometimes very long posts probably skewed my perception on proper ordering.
        At any rate, to reiterate from my only other post this blog:
        Moving from a participation to dictation model is bad enough, but deliberately expunging all the previously accumulated comment inputs is just so very 1984 Orwellian Ministry of Truth in character. No good reason other than responding to pressure from certain influential interest groups imo. But that’s me being skeptical I suppose.

  65. Macky says:

    MBDK pronounces : ” I currently refuse to reply directly to Macky, as he has proven himself to be anything but what he claims.”

    The reason of course is that MBDK has no coherent counters to US govt evidence which directly contradicts its own Official Story of Fl77.

    Look, here’s Brian’s Pentagon Missile article where I certainly have proven him wrong in one of his Myths :

    Myth #1 I totally agree with Brian. BUT the gate vids also do not identify Fl77 N644AA either.

    Myth #2 Totally agree again. I think the myth may have gained traction from an erroneous alleged flight path that is still forwarded in some quarters as we speak, that had “Fl77” flying over the Pentagon, missing its target on the first try and turning to have another go. The approach was from the south-west (NTSB flight study), so the Rumsfeld thing is a non-argument.

    Myth #3 Agree with Brian. Debris was everywhere. But once again whether it was Fl77 or not is only an assurance from the US govt. Doesn’t matter with my evidence, Fl77 or not.

    Myth #5 Totally agree with Brian. Too many planes to choose from and no time to effectively defend the Pentagon.

    Myth #4 This is where I emphatically disagree with Skeptoid.
    “When the hijackers brought the plane to the Pentagon, they were still too high…” Why ? I asked this early in the discussions re the article. No answer. If a hick pilot can perform a ripping descending turn that loses 5000 ft by roll-out, then he can easily perform a steepish descent from 3.5 miles out, from 7000 ft and bomb the roof of the Pentagon, 29 acres of target, doing far more damage with less risk of losing the aircraft on the turn.

    ” O’Brien has been very clear that there’s no question it was the 757, and that unsafe doesn’t mean ..etc”

    The interview when read properly clearly indicates that it was conducted 6 weeks after 9-11. By then O’Brien et al would certainly “know” that their primary radar target that she and all her ATC’s thought was a military aircraft, a fighter, by the way it was being flown “the speed, the maneuverability” was a B757, Fl77, hijacked by Islamic terrorists etc.
    Who told her ?
    This misrepresentation of her interview was echoed by 911myths and has been used by OS supporters ever since. I pointed that out to Skeptoid. No replies.

    Skeptoid’s final sentence ” Hold the “official story” to a high standard, but don’t simply be hostile to our existing knowledge base. ”
    The official knowledge base is in the form of US govt files which clearly indicate that the US govt Official Story of Fl77 of 9-11 ( as per alleged perpetrators) is unsupported by any solid evidence, both in critical analysis, and US govt files.

    All that has been ignored for over 21 months.

  66. Macky says:

    asydhouse & MBDK

    Your continued ad hominem attacks and unsupported personal observations only attempt to pass the buck for not actually addressing what I’ve said on here, and examining the FBI files that I’ve asked you (and Noah) to examine more than once.

    Yesterday I posted a summary of Brian’s Pentagon Missile thread, which seems to have disappeared at the moment, in which I AGREED with the majority of Brian’s analysis and thoughts on the subject.

    It’s a pity that post is not up, because it provides the evidence that I do NOT dwell in some fantasy world, but that I actually examine what Skeptoid and posters have to say, without descending into personal attacks that only diminish the quality of this site.

    ALL my criticisms of Skeptoid’s 9-11 articles were either evidences against the US govt Official Story, or most notably, criticisms of the investigative process.

    This criticism extended out to the JFK Warren Commission and the TWA800 fiasco as well, WITHOUT ever asserting any conspiracy theory whatsoever.

    And all I’ve ever asked anyone here is to examine the evidence which I’ve brought to Skeptoid against the Official Story of 9-11 and in particular, Fl77.
    Then we can have a discussion without all the evasions and insulting nonsense.

    AND I’ve said since 3.5 years ago on Skeptoid that if anyone’s evidence is better than mine, I will change my beliefs/attitude and acknowledge that.

    Is that too much to ask on a supposedly skeptical site ?

    • Bill Morgan says:

      Macky, You are debating with people in the basement bunker of the CIA in Langley. Their job is to debunk and insult anyone in the Truth movement who exposes their Black Ops secrets. BTW, I don’t believe in conspiracies. But I do believe that the government, politicians and bureaucrats Lie, Deceive, and Cover-up Crimes. And of course ALL governments engage in False Flag Covert Operations. But a conspiracy, no, there are no conspiracies. Just bad people doing bad things. It’s all about Money and Power. Give psychopaths enough Money and Power and they will gladly do bad things to good people. There are plenty of psychopaths in government.

      • Macky says:

        Bill, I posted replies to your post some 4 days ago, which disappeared shortly after and have not resurfaced, so I assume my post was deleted.

        While I agree with the ultimate trend of your thoughts, I certainly believe that conspiracies do exist, and that has been proven by history.

        Taking the definition of a conspiracy i.e. “A secret plan by a group to do something unlawful or harmful” the list of conspiracies as Noah himself has posted on here :
        “Watergate was a government conspiracy. Iran-Contra was a government conspiracy. The toppling of the Diem regime was a government conspiracy. The Bay of Pigs was a government conspiracy. The Bush administration’s push for a war in Iraq was a government conspiracy. But all these conspiracies were demonstrated with evidence. ”
        ….show without question that the US govt (collectively) have conspired to invade countries, lie, and engage in regime change that has cost the lives of millions of innocent people.

        I would add Northwoods to that list
        ..where 40 years pre-911, the Joint Chiefs of Staff considered and approved of a general plan that included American homeland bombings, the sinking of a ship of refugees, the painting of an aircraft in duplicate civil livery, the guiding and detonation of a similar aircraft/drone over Cuba, the framing of Cuban immigrants and the provision of false papers designed to implicate Cuban terrorism on the US and swing public opinion towards a full-scale military invasion of Cuba.

        Like I have mentioned before on Skeptoid, the evidence is mainstream, proven done and dusted, that uniformed military personnel and movers and shakers behind the scenes like Kissinger have a long history of plotting to murder and otherwise exploit their “own” country’s citizens in bogus jacked-up wars.

        Which is another important reason why those who consider themselves intelligent critical thinkers should examine the evidence which clearly goes against the US govt Official Story of 9-11, and Fl77 in particular, that I have posted links to on Skeptoid.

        • Bill Morgan says:


          When I said “I don’t believe in conspiracies. But I do believe that the government, politicians and bureaucrats Lie, Deceive, and Cover-up Crimes” I was saying that tongue in cheek. Of course there are Government conspiracies and I believe they are true. It was a joke. Tom

          • Macky says:

            Thanks for clearing that up, Bill.

            I must be suffering from taking the “skeptics” too seriously, and it flowed over onto your post 🙂

            Comes from treating their derision on here in a proper and civil manner, I guess. Still, I won’t play their game.
            I back everything I say with solid evidence, not personal attacks.

        • Kevin says:

          And yet, for all that admiral capacity to see through and openly deride the official spiel on 9-11 and similar US ‘insider’ false flag ops, you fell in behind the official ‘Holocaust’ narrative re the essential argument Hitler/’Nazi’ regime deliberately planned and attempted the extermination of all European Jews via mainly mass gassings. As per your comments (all comments there and elsewhere at skeptoid now conveniently wiped) ‘Holocaust Denial’ thread:

          Unlike probably everyone else here, I learned from ‘accidental disaster’ events at other forum sites, and made running saves of full webpage on a semi-regular basis. So the following is a verbatim not ‘as I recall’ reproduction of the essential part of one such comment of mine that thread:
          “So, once again, that vid by Steven Anderson:

          Let’s just focus on one crucial aspect covered there – logistics of alleged mass cremations at Auschwitz-Birkenau main ‘death camp’. No, not the outrageously inflated 4 million figure that stood unchallenged for around 45 years. Not even the MkII figure of 1.5 million. Just the ‘final downward revision’ one of ~ 1.1 million in toto.
          That bit is covered well enough from around the 7:00 minute mark, till ~ 14:00 minute mark. Can you spare 7 minutes of time on this one Brian?
          Given you ‘know’ the official story is sound – please, DO meaningfully and honestly engage me on this matter of basic logistics. What is your rebuttal to Anderson’s (and of course many others) simple calculations. Calculations any butcher, baker, candle-stick maker could perform with ease.”

          Everyone has their limits re ‘the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth’. Just to remind though, I never got a single *objective* response to my challenge for Brian or anyone else to tackle the logistical absurdities pointed out clearly in that Youtube vid. And of course there is a mountain of further well documented but methodically suppressed evidence on that particularly taboo topic. Far more taboo than even 9-11, for which there is no draconian equivalent of mandatory fines and/or jail terms – just for voicing doubts about the Official Narrative.
          As others with enough savvy have pointed out, 9-11 & ensuing ‘war on terror’ is a natural extension of ‘Holocaust’ BS propaganda, the sole true beneficiaries being certain tribal supremacists.
          “To learn who rules over you, simply find out who you are not allowed to criticize.” – apparently misattributed to Voltaire, but regardless, true anyway. So, just find out in which 14 or so countries which Sacred Topic is protected from all and any legitimate inquiry via ruthlessly enforced mandatory fines and/or prison terms – extended to any lawyer or judge foolish enough to offer any defense whatsoever to the hapless individual daring to so challenge the Official Narrative. Something not smell bad there?

          • Macky says:

            That’s right Kevin, I did fall in behind the official narrative re the Holocaust for several reasons. Unlike 9-11, we were not living at the time of the Holocaust.

            While that may not seem like an important point, there is always an advantage where an event(s) have taken place in one’s lifetime, because one has an extra portion of personal experience to tee off from. The evidence for and against something like 9-11 is current, not 70-80 tears old.

            Another point that I tried to make on the Holocaust thread was that most of the arguments seemed to hinge on 5 or 6 camps where various assertions of evidence of victim remains either existed or not.
            Nobody from memory took any notice of my comments that the Holocaust lasted from the time Hitler took power, to the end of the second world war, a 12-year history where not only Jews but prisoners of war, Gypsies, mentally disabled, homosexuals etc were systematically either worked to death or exterminated immediately they alighted from trains and trucks.

            The Holocaust deniers, and the more coherent revisionists cite lack of evidence as an example of a concerted regime of extermination of “inferior” peoples, using some points that focus on a few camps, while seemingly forgetting that the Nazi’s made great efforts to destroy documentary evidence of their doings, pending over-running of their camps by Russian and Allied forces.

            A youtube I promised to watch re Holocaust history revision already has a few errors judgment based on comparison within the first hour e.g. types of WW2 freight cars used to transport detainees to camps not being the same as modern American freight cars, therefore it didn’t happen.

            Apart from that nonsense, comparing the Holocaust with 9-11 is not a good comparison. I am sure that in some quarters, the Holocaust is used to advantage in some way, but 9-11 is a far more world-changing event (that is, used to change the world) than the Holocaust ever was/is.

            9-11 is the most important series of events since the Second world war, and current evidence NOT from archives or historical accounts exists i.e. US govt agency files that are up to date, and which directly conflict with the US govt Official Story of who the 9-11 alleged perpetrators were.

          • Erique says:

            @Kevin, you have the usual errant illogical thinking of a conspiracy nut.

            1) why should someone have to believe the Holocaust ‘a lie’ just because they think 9/11 was an inside job? Makes no sense…is the kind of illogic we remove from a court of law.

            2) one could use your argument to state the opposite case is true; because someone believes the Holocaust is a true occurrence, then the ‘official’ 9/11 is true. Can’t you see that?

            Each event stands on its own merits and evidence, what happened before or since is not relevant (unless, of course, new evidence directly linked to the event comes to light)…this is why in a court of law we don’t tell a jury that a defendant has already committed a similar crime, because people DO taint their thinking with personal biases and bigotry; conspiracy nuts are mostly suspicious of any official entity, governments more so, this is why they continually have to drag up old ‘proven’ cases of conspiracy or False Flag as evidence for their delusion. If the delusion can’t stand on its own two feet, then it cannot be accepted as fact.

          • Kevin says:

            Erique says:
            January 25, 2016 at 12:44 am

            @Kevin, you have the usual errant illogical thinking of a conspiracy nut.

            1) why should someone have to believe the Holocaust ‘a lie’ just because they think 9/11 was an inside job? Makes no sense…is the kind of illogic we remove from a court of law…

            Just noticed above entry by erique. It ‘makes no sense’ as you put it because you have misconstrued what I actually said and meant. Which was that applying the same rules of logic to extant real evidence in both events should logically lead one to the same overall conclusion. Massive deception designed to sheet the blame away from actual perpetrators/instigators/real war-criminals, for ideologically motivated political/strategic gain. The remainder of your entry there similarly runs off on a tangent.

  67. Mateus Bittencourt says:

    That’s in my opinion is the worst thing you’ve done… And look you just spent a year in jail.

    99.99% of people who block comments are people who are afraid of what others have to say. You cite Snopes… That’s because Snopes is a fraudulent and shady site.

    Wikipedia has in every article a “discussion” section. Where you can say anything, and propose changes. You just can’t edit the article page.

    Unfortunately you are being dishonest with your audience… Since I know why you are doing this now.

    It’s because in every episode, there are people pointing out you were in jail for fraud, and unfortunately you’re trying to hide this.

    I understand this… it makes sense from a business perspective to try and hide the truth. Since you are after all asking for donations. But just immoral in my opinion to try and hide and tell lies.

    I loved the podcast… Loved even though you were in jail… I don’t know if I can continue loving it now…

    I hope you reconsider the path you’re taking.

    Best wishes,

    Mateus Bittencourt

    • Macky says:

      Mateus I’m sorry but I cannot agree with you taking a cheap shot at Brian re his jail term.

      He has NOT tried to hide that fact and if you look up on Google you can read his “Setting The Record Straight(er)” account of what actually happened to him, and the media frenzy afterwards which only took the Prosecution’s version.

      His FD-302 FBI interrogation should ring warning bells in any democratic society, and in my opinion completely nullified any fair trial. A quick look at the process of the FBI FD-302 should show you why.

      The so-called fraud was in fact encouraged by the very company that later complained, as far as I can see, and as usual, it’s always much easier to scone a single individual than to cast any doubt on a corporate, especially when said individual has a public profile.

      I do not agree with Skeptoid getting rid of most of its comments sections either, but I do understand why it was done. What I do not agree with about Skeptoid re its comments and agenda has nothing to do with any criminal actions, jail terms, convictions etc, and in my opinion any mention of same should be left out of the existing comments sections.

      • Mateus Bittencourt says:

        I don’t think I “took a cheap shot”… I only made a joke about this [the comments being removed] being worse than what he did to go to jail. And in my opinion it’s true.

        I really don’t care why he was in jail, if he deserved or not. And more importantly… I don’t know, and can never know, all the facts for me to reach a conclusion on that matter. So I refrain myself from doing so.

        What I do care is he lying about why his taking the comments down. As I said… the only people I know on the internet who forbids feedback, or actively erases and blocks [non offensive] comments are the people who are afraid of what other have to say.

        Just go to any creationists, or promoter of any pseudoscience, site or even YouTube page. If comments are not disable, they are heavily moderated so any comment disagreeing or with real science are erased and the person banned.

        In the other hand look at The Atheist Experience, where the whole show is basically people calling and spewing the same bullshit over and over and over. You would think it’s useless… they would never change the minds of the people calling. And while this is probably true, it’s not for them, but for the other 99% who doesn’t call (or comment in this case) who watch (listen/read) who may believe in the same thing but will reevaluate their position.

        While, as Brian said, the comment section had far more misinformation than real, tangible, good information. People were debunking the pseudoscience being promoted there. Someone who may believe in such things may be tempted to read the comments in search of agreeing opinions, and while they will find, they will also find responses to that person.

        This, plus the episode, may start to change that person opinions. But a closed system, like Skeptoid is now, only serves to alienate this people with disagreeing opinions, making sure they will never come to the site again. So whats the point of Skeptoid afterwards them? Just so people who already don’t believe in pseudoscience to confirm they own believe?

        And the worst part of it all is that Brian knows all of this. But he had to make a business decision since, as I said, people were commenting about his fraud sentence in every episode while he was asking for donations. This is bad for business, since who would donate to someone convicted of fraud? And what upsets me the most is not the fact that he’s doing this, is the fact that he’s lying about his true motives.

        • Macky says:

          I understand what you are saying Mateus. The problem in my mind is that nobody will really know if Brian deserved to go to jail or not, given the Police State style of so-called FBI interview which he was subjected to, and which he would not be allowed to correct.
          That solely should be sufficient grounds for any case to be thrown out of court, but apparently in the USA, land of freedom and democracy, such FBI “testimony” is not only taken as bona fide, but utterly binding with no redress possible.
          On the strength of that, my opinion is that any mention of jail terms etc on a site for so-called skepticism and science are inappropriate. Only my opinion.

          My criticism for Brian taking down his comments section (and certainly deleting all existing comments) was because Skeptoid no longer is a site for skeptics. In fact it is simply one man’s opinion echoed by his backers, many who themselves have failed to exercise the minutest fragment of critical analysis on a few contentious subjects, and in fact totally ignored the very evidence that they themselves often call for.

          Worse still, classrooms and students will call into a site which has no coherent arguments against American pseudo-history, and will accept what they are told re 9-11, Pearl Harbour, TWA800, JFK etc by Skeptoid as gospel, firstly not knowing any better at their age, and most importantly because Skeptoid also presents already-proven science.

          The two agendas (even apart from the conspiracy theory bashing which has already been roundly criticized and proven wrong in the old Skeptoid) will be merged in the young persons’ minds, and yet another generation of students will be mis-informed, not so much in the absence of the real truth, but in the authentic application of what Critical Analysis really is.

          My first post here was a response to Brian’s assertion re “absurd conspiracy theories” which is largely untrue, especially from myself because I have NEVER promoted any conspiracy theory about 9-11 or in particular Flight 77.
          So if that is in fact a major reason why Skeptoid’s comments section has closed down, then I can see where that is simply not true.
          In the meantime, Skeptoid cannot properly call itself a site for skeptics, and for critical analysis of pop phenomena, any longer.

    • Erique says:

      @Mateus Bittencourt, moderating forums and comment sections is getting crazily out of control, now, people do litigate, and someone somewhere is responsible for all comments. Nearly every post by someone like Macky is accusatory to someone or something, and the posts are long, if he just made a short statement then his reputation as a ‘bag of wind’ not worthy of being read may have gone. Instead he rants and rants, then links back to other irrelevant cases as ‘evidence for his delusions.

      Primarily Skeptiod is an educational site, many such sites out there do not have comments at all, Skeptoid had one (a mistake I think), and now conspiracy nuts are butthurt because their delusions are being revealed for what they are, with no chance of whining about it.

      When I read the errant illogical tosh that conspiracy nuts type in forums, I know that if I were ever to have a site anything like Skeptoid, I would not have a comment section; there are plenty of sites to discuss unicorns, leprechauns, God, gods, Santa Claus, kraken, alternative realities and fantasies…I can’t see why conspiracy nuts are butthurt over one stopping comments.

      Moderating does take away useful resources, a 10 minute Macky diatribe may take 15 minutes to an hour to dissect, cross-refer between mods to post or delete, time that could be used to research another episode. Think about it. Skeptoid has put out there an episode, it has placed links to the resources it has used, why does it need any comment? If Skeptoid were published solely in a book form as a paperback or hardback, what would you do then?

      Also, Brian claims that the folks making the comments are mostly not paying members, and I am yet to read a comment from someone decrying this; has any paying member/donor typed any a response saying they make long comments AND pay their dues?

      If it is true that most commenters are not paying into the site, then moderating them is counter-productive.

      There is no need for individual comments on each episode.

      • Macky says:

        “There is no need for individual comments on each episode.”

        Then why did Skeptoid used to invite posters to comment ? Because it was a skeptical site for critical analysis.

        Now that that is over, by and large, Skeptoid becomes a site for sycophantic followers of US Govt versions of the truth that they believe in, plus some genuine scientific facts.

        But Skeptoid is no longer a skeptics site for critical analysis. So be it.

  68. Kevin says:

    So I posted a somewhat lengthy response to Macky:
    “Kevin says:
    Your comment is awaiting moderation.
    January 13, 2016 at 11:49 pm ……..”
    And here it is, around 5:45pm, Jan 14, Pacific time, and that response still not approved?! Hmm…..

    • mudguts says:

      Maybe Skeptoid blogs has a policy on lengthy responses to Macky. It only makes him mad and will make him post a series of redacted anecdotes within a mini thesis promptly cobbled together.

      Jeez, the Skepoid comments are much nicer now..

      • erique says:

        @mudguts, anyone even swiftly browsing just these comments can see the lengthy (and often logically questionable) comments by Macky et al, ‘Gish Gallop’ is a favourite tool of conspiracy nuts…

        @Kevin, so, there’s a delay in a post being approved (or deleted) and that its a conspiracy too? Can your brain cope with breathing unaided? The fact that you, Macky and your like type lengthy response all the time is one reason comment moderation is a nightmare.

        Your ‘poster girl’ Macky is one of the worst offenders, in the old days of commentary, the majority of his posts kept mentioning other posts he had made; for example, ranting about ‘Pearl Harbor’ in the ‘9/11 conspiracy threads…how does that advance his position?

        Here’s the thing, you folks take one contention of an institution that is proven correct, for example, Watergate’, and use that as ‘evidence’ for entirely unrelated events. For example, IF the US had deliberately set up Imperial Japan to start a ware in the Pacific, that has no bearing on 9/11. This is why in a court of law your past acts are not used as evidence of current cases…one of the few things the law has right, imo.

        • Bill Morgan says:

          Of course there are no government conspiracies. Only admitted to false flag terror.

          And false flag terror events are pulled off without anyone being involved in a conspiracy! They are done by lone nuts. If you believe there was a conspiracy involved in any of the these false flag events, you must sleep with your tin foil hat on.

          • Macky says:


            I seriously doubt people like erique will even look at the link you sent, never mind discuss it.
            They are so entrenched in their belief system, that all sensible discussion is off the table, most notably demonstrated by their refusal to answer to evidence and strong arguments that are directly against their world view.
            Even more indication of their assertions reflecting nothing more a belief that the US govt has told the truth in, say Fl77 of 9-11, is the absence of any coherent argument to support their position, and the inevitable descent into personal attacks and derision.
            In fact, the louder said attacks, the more you can be sure that they know nothing about what they are getting so worked up over.

        • Kevin says:

          So easy to simply accuse ideological foes of being ranters/conspiracy nutters/(add further pejorative terms here) erique. Not so easy to provide objective counterarguments dealing with specific claims (by definition ‘rants’ in eriques worldview) of ‘conspiracy nutters’. Feel perfectly free to *objectively* debunk my own original ‘rant’ challenge in Holocaust Denial (TM) article, reproduced earlier here. Hahaha – of course that would be beneath your dignity. Why, merely entertaining the very idea would just ‘lend undue credence to a Hater (TM)’. Still, if you were prepared to give it a stab, who knows, one of us might receive a positive jolt. And engage in actual soul-searching.

          And btw, straw-man arguments claiming anyone here really believes say Watergate establishes anything other than that conspiracies in high places are proven to have taken place, is very poor form.

          • mudguts says:

            Probably because we aren’t into argument by assertion and crank quoting..

            After a few weeks of that you never go to lookey sees that are posted and especially those not analysed by the person who posts them..

            The perfect storm of rogue waves.. ends up in just ignoring the rants..

            Skeptoid comments was never meant to be a resource and never became one..

            But; It owuld be nice for Brian to link his how to talk to a conspiracist Skeptoid to this train..

            Its a QED moment.

  69. Kevin says:

    I get it Brian. The looong pending bit is the message. No point in ruffling feathers here at skeptoid. So no sweat – I withdraw that comment of mine that evidently has caused you so much angst. Just wipe it. Let’s all smile and be nice and concentrate on ‘important’ topics, not ‘trivialities’.

    • Macky says:

      That’s a pity, Kevin. I would like to have read what you had to say.

      Bill is on the ball when it comes to 9-11 etc. The only responses against the evidence I’ve posted links to is derision and unseemly inferences supposedly from “skeptics”, or perhaps as Bill says, those that are on US govt agency payrolls.
      Given the lack of coherency and unremitting derision from those posters, I beginning to think Bill may well be right as far as Skeptoid is concerned.

  70. mudguts says:

    There you go Kevin.. Maybe Bill should have his own Corspiracist site and Macky should got back to comedy, rants and misgivings in strandpulling..

    • Macky says:

      I thought you said you had left Skeptoid, Henk. Seems you can’t make up your mind about that.

      “Skeptoid comments was never meant to be a resource and never became one..”

      How do you know what Skeptoid comments were supposed to be or not ? And yes, the comments WERE a fine resource for clear thinkers to examine how so-called skeptics and scientists can ignore plain evidence that goes against their beliefs, and avoid at all costs answering straight questions with straight and informed answers.

  71. mudguts says:

    rubbish.. Skeptoid comments were for comments.

    • Macky says:

      Exactly. We were ALL invited to discuss. And we did.

      Some of us brought evidence and Skeptoid’s own mandate ( critical analysis ) to the table.
      Others brought derision and meandering nonsense in answer to those like myself that were skeptical of SOME official stories.

      Some simply refused to answer straight questions.

      Now the comments have largely been all shut down which now renders Skeptoid no longer a skeptics’ site.
      So be it.

  72. mudguts says:

    No you were all invited to comment and you and I did ad nauseam. Your evidence however was generally special pleading, arguments to appeal and populism and assertion. Question begging didnt help either.

    If you think pointing out that you incorporated blog into your experience was derision you’re welcome. Complain away.. Argument to unsupported complaint is just another method you use.

    You lost the right to question after your mantra (ARE YOU A PILOT???)

    Skeptoid is a skeptics site that was welcome to comment by all.. Even the wild whacking crack woo artists who se a chi between every brick..

    So what.. creationism is dead.

    • Macky says:

      Absolutely unsupported generalizations from someone who wasted his undoubtedly vast intellect on derision and ill-concealed contempt.

      I have posted solid evidence for my position on only a few matters that I questioned re the Official Story.

      The other matters that I posted from personal experience I did not assert that they had any scientific validity ( and still don’t), and only asked those that were interested to try for themselves and make what they will of it, nothing more.

      For example, after several posts of your derision you made the assertion (on the How To See Your Aura thread) that you had immediately seen what I was talking about, but when asked over a dozen times to describe what you saw you would not answer.

      Other observations that I have made that are non-scientific ( and which also came under fire ) I clearly stated that I was not asserting their scientific validity.

      “You lost the right to question after your mantra (ARE YOU A PILOT???)”

      I have no idea what you mean by your above statement.

      Skeptoid was not a site just for scientists such as yourself. It was a site for all, uneducated and educated alike.

      The opportunity that you had Henk to properly engage in attempting to improve the knowledge base of scientific facts and answer straight questions of those things which science does not generally entertain, was squandered by your continuous derision and sarcasm which was outstanding from all the other scientists that posted into Skeptoid.

      You denigrated your own calling which by your comments to others demonstrated that in fact science is your religion, and like a religious fanatic, you responded to non-scientific assertions and personal experience with almost unremitting meandering confabulation that several other non-woo posters commented on as well.

      Its a fine record that you can look back on, Henk.

      Skepticism coupled with critical analysis it is not.

  73. mudguts says:

    They were observations Macky..

    • Macky says:

      They were unsupported speculative derision Henk. You’ve given an example above of the sort of crackpottery you engaged in “the wild whacking crack woo artists who se a chi between every brick..”

      Have you forgotten your “awards” that you bestowed upon me, and which I took in good humour, posting back similar fun which you then spat the dummy to, making a complete Roger Sole of yourself.

  74. mudguts says:

    Nope.. they were observations based on your tactics since you started bleating like a stuck pig in the LHC in 2011?

    We have established that you are now going to stop whingeing and start working on your research skills (which are absolutely atrocious).

    Get with it Macky, you arent the “brian invited” skeptoid crank, quack conspiracist commenter and its no use behving like the uninvited one here.

    Learn your stuff for a change. Read your material and analyse it. Another 4 years of your antics will have Brian shutting down the skeptoid blog comments as well..

    Read learn, analyse, formulate… write..

    In the gym of commentary you have to move past the knee jerks and cling to likes…

    Cut and paste lifestyle..hehehehehe

    • Macky says:

      Care to describe to the Skeptoid blog what it was that you asserted you saw when you followed my directions on the Aura thread ? It was a simple exercise that anyone could try for a few weeks that would hopefully enable one to see a purple or grey glow around one’s fingers/hands. Nothing profound.

      Erique asserted he could see an “aura” around himself when he was “woo-woo” (but now he uses his brain to think. God knows what he used it for before) but when I asked him some questions on it, he wouldn’t answer.

      Like yourself.

      You have no idea about Brian’s and my emails.

    • MBDK says:

      I agree. Wacky is living up to his name. His hubris won’t allow him to see what the VAST majority of the posters see. And when I say VAST, I of course, mean DIFFERENT posters. Wacky and the other CTists think the number of POSTS, not the number of individuals constitutes a valid claim (obviously not – at least not to a rational person). That seems to be why they perform the “cut and paste” ad nauseam, because, as like any autistic-savant, it seems to makes sense in THEIR minds. I replied to Wacky earlier (I have since delegated him to the “ignore” heap) and he didn’t even realize that where I proved he was wrong was with his own supplied evidence. I can tell you EXACTLY how that happened – he found a link that supported his position and supplied that. However, I followed THAT link’s links to its references and discovered that THOSE links said just the opposite of what the article claimed. So, I provided THOSE links in my reply, and he ignored them, of course – not realizing they were the BASIS of his supposed point.
      Still, he rants on about others not reading his crap. The problem is, he doesn’t do likewise, and doesn’t figure on people being smart enough to read beyond the surface of his crap. So, here he posts and whines and cries and pretends to be something he’s not (meaning even remotely unprejudiced on the issues), because, as MAYO said in “An Officer and a Gentleman”, “I got nowhere else to go!”

      • Macky says:

        The only link I can readily locate that MBDK posted is this one here :

        Which I have no particular problem with, having always asserted that the Pentagon was hit by some sort of airliner-type plane.
        That it was Fl77 is only the assurance of the US govt, nothing more. It may well be, but then again a cursory glance at BTS shows that Fl77 never took off that day.

        In answer to more ad hominem attacks as usual, I posted several links to FBI files that clearly contradict the Official Story of not only Fl77, but 9-11 in general.

        Even though this is only Skeptoid blog, it would be well served by a civil discussion on those said links, for example, rather than the sort of nonsense that seem to issue from the so-called VAST majority of “skeptics” on here.

        Not that the majority necessarily are right, just because they are the majority.

        In the meantime, the majority of my posts are responses to others’ posts, only.
        When a so-called skeptic starts up with his unevidenced claims, he can be sure to receive a response from yours truly, with some solid evidence in attendance.

        • Bill Morgan says:

          All truth passes through three stages. First, it is ridiculed. Second, it is violently opposed. Third, it is accepted as being self-evident. Arthur Schopenhauer 1788-1860

          You cannot reason a man out of a position that he did not reason himself into in the first place. Jonathan Swift. 1667-1745

          It’s easier to fool people than to convince them they have been fooled. Will Rogers 1879-1935

          There is not the slightest indication that nuclear energy will ever be obtainable. It would mean that the atom would have to be shattered at will. Albert Einstein in 1932. 1879-1955

          Argument cannot be answered with insults. Kindness is strength. Anger blows out the lamp of the mind. Robert Ingersoll 1833-1899

          The majority is often wrong. Just look at our election results. Bill Morgan

          • Marg says:

            Excellent references.

          • Macky says:

            Yes Bill, it’s been quite obvious over the last 3.5 years on Skeptoid that when it comes to 9-11, the four flights were not the only things allegedly hijacked that day, evidenced by all the mindless name-calling and derision by so-called skeptics.

            The term “conspiracy theory” itself has now become an expression of paranoia and irrationality, instead of what it actually is by definition.

            Skeptoid shares a large part of the blame for this, as its many posts that “deal” with conspiracy theories demonstrate, often with redefinitions and inaccurate observations designed to engender the sort of comments that Erique and MBDK engage in.

            In fact when one examines Erique’s recent comment ..”These Illuminati Reptilian Overlords managed to pull-off every Black Op from crashed alien spacecraft to crashing planes into two big towers, yet they can’t silence a handful of nuts on the Internet?”….one wonders who the real nuts are.

          • Bill Morgan says:

            The term conspiracy theory has been banned. Conspiracy theories must hence forth be referred to by their correct names. Lies, deceptions, cover-ups and false flag operations. By Executive Order, Barack Obama.

      • erique says:


        “I got nowhere else to go!”

        I’ll wager Wacky has that printed a T-shirt…or maybe on one of those sailor hats, replacing the ribbon for ‘USS XXXXX’

        MBDK, I liked the fact you used Wacky’s own links to debunk Wacky…so often the way of the conspiracy nut to post links, knowing readers are too lazy to click them through to check sources. I’ve noted in the past that some ‘sources’ linked on conspiracy websites are sometimes domains or blogs registered to the fool citing the source.

        Often a whole blog may be the only source, and we all know how easy a blog is to create…along with a youtube channel to support it -it’s on the internet, it must be true.

        As I have said before, here and elsewhere, the fact is, IF there were a major worldwide conspiracy by any all-powerful entity, wouldn’t they have taken down all the ‘twoofer’ websites by now? These Illuminati Reptilian Overlords managed to pull-off every Black Op from crashed alien spacecraft to crashing planes into two big towers, yet they can’t silence a handful of nuts on the Internet?

        They can’t have it both ways, either these entities are all-powerful, or they are not, and I’m darn sure that any entity that can, allegedly, plan 9/11, kill its own citizens and then throw the blame onto a bunch of Arab terrorists, can make a few brain-dead morons ‘disappear’.

        • Macky says:

          It’s unfortunate that posters who regard themselves as skeptics, even ex-woo-woo such as erique, feel the need to pile in with name-calling and personal abuse in place of careful considered thinking re the 9-11 attacks, and Flight 77 in particular.

          MBDK has certainly not used the links I sent to debunk my arguments/assertions.

          Nowhere has MBDK discussed the FBI or BTS files, or even the Dulles ATC interview, and it seems beyond the ken of erique to even contemplate that the PTB do not have to remove persons such as myself who DO NOT propose any conspiracy theories on the subject in the first place, but present US govt own evidence against their Official Story of Fl77 etc., only.

          Two reasons become obvious with some elementary thought.
          Firstly, as I’ve already said, with “skeptics” like erique and MBDK continuously piling in with their hateful derision and snide insinuations, there is no need to remove those that have found evidence that contradicts what appears to the latest US govt war jack-up.

          Secondly, as a non-conspiracy theorist on this subject, I have proposed no culprits whatsoever, therefore I cannot be making things too hot for who the real culprits may have been, to cause them to “remove” me.

          The PTB is not, and has never been, entirely a permanent group of string-pullers, at least in our westernized countries. They change among themselves as some pass away or are removed by other means.
          However there are some prominent families who have carried on for generations that continue to influence world events in some form or other.
          The others of course as always, are the financial manipulators such as the Fed.Res. and the European Commission, both engaged in totally undemocratic processes as we speak.

          The US govt has a long record of planning to kill and abuse its own citizens, and the records of that are mainstream.

          That does not mean that the US govt carried out 9-11.

          But their Official Story of at least one of the Flights has been proven bogus in many fundamental ways, NOT by speculation and wild accusations, but by US govt agencies’ own files.

          And you can’t get more solid evidence than that.

          • Mudguts says:

            Macky… lookeysees arent evidence.. Why should he read that unconvincing garbage.. or even reply to someone who cant remain consistent from post to post..

            Looks like you just want to argue.

            See that front door? During the day you can go…outside.

  75. mudguts says:

    MB.. Macky was playing a role he thought he earned. He seems to want to participate here. All we have to do is point out his flaws from time to time.

    Mind you.. we do expect research if he us going to go full manukau moa… thats analysed research.

    We’d like a bit of stimulus.. not waves of assertion. Us evil scientists who hide waves under our beds are a bit like that..

  76. Macky says:

    “Mudguts says:
    February 2, 2016 at 5:51 am
    Macky… lookeysees arent evidence.. Why should he read that unconvincing garbage.. or even reply to someone who cant remain consistent from post to post..”

    What’s a lookysee ? I’ve asked you that before. You didn’t answer.

  77. huxley says:

    I’ve moderated comment sections for years in various venues. It’s true: commenters can be troublesome and comment sections require time and effort. Furthermore, I believe Brian when he says commenters aren’t any more likely to donate to Skeptoid.

    However, Brian also links his decision to that of other websites which have shut down their comment sections.

    Brian fails to mention these websites are almost entirely liberal. While these liberal sites justify their decisions in high-minded terms about the low-quality of the comments, to those of us more cynical it looks like the liberal narrative is losing in the public square and to liberals this is intolerable.

    The solution liberals have hit upon is to shout down, censor, ban and even criminalize speech they don’t like. One aspect of this is the decision by liberal websites, including Skeptoid, to eliminate comments altogether.

    I consider this bad faith from the very people who wrap themselves in the mantle of Reason but lack the courage and honesty to practice it.

    Sadly Brian is in this category.

    • Noah Dillon says:

      I don’t know where you get a “liberal” read from Skeptoid, which is specifically and explicitly non-partisan, apolitical, and strictly focused on science and pop culture. (For that matter, I don’t know where you find the “liberal” bias of those other sites.) Skeptoid has been pretty good at looking at history, fads, magical thinking beloved by all kinds of people. Furthermore, as you’ll note in the episode dealing with this issue, it’s not Skeptoid’s obligation to host the ranting of angry, cynical, or magical-thinking trolls. If you want to dig through rubbish, spam, and vitriol, please, by all means, found an alternative. (I suppose you’d call it “conservative,” taking any sense of meaning out of pretty narrowly defined terms.)

      Do you have a more substantive complaint, or did you simply post that to show that A. you know how to wield an anonymous ad hominem attack, B. you know how to build a straw man, and C. you’re eager to demonstrate the exact reasons that comments have been dispensed with on the episode pages? I mean really, man, get a grip.

      • Macky says:

        I’m also not sure what “liberal” means, but it’s true that by not only shutting down new comments, but also the removal of posters’ comments over the years, Skeptoid becomes just another site for one man’s written opinion, certainly not a site for skeptics.

        By the removal of posters’ comments over the years, visitors have no chance of reading anything that may provide a balance to said one man’s opinions (albeit mostly well-evidenced) and because many of them will be too young to have any opinions of their own, they will no doubt accept much of the blatant pseudo-historical accounts of Skeptoid’s articles re important events in modern times, not having any opportunity to read any arguments against, whatsoever.

        The evidence that has been provided for same over the years has not been nonsense. It has been carefully gathered and critically analyzed according to Skeptoid’s own mandate. Skeptoid has never provided a coherent argument against most of said evidence, and the removal of poster’s comments now provides a clean slate for anything Skeptoid wishes to put out to the public, and the removal of anything against its own articles.

        That is a form of censorship, especially when Skeptoid is supposed to be a site for skeptical analysis, which of course it has now ceased to be.

        • cybp says:

          Visitors have plenty of opportunity to balance opinions found here as there are myriad other sources of information in the entire world online and offline. Not publishing someone’s comment is not censorship, it’s common editorial practice. Anyone can get a wordpress account, link a page from this site and write whatever commentary they desire. Not publishing comments does not impede or prevent critical discussion, it doesnt ban or criminalize speech, it doesn’t stop impressionable young readers from Googling “rebuttal of (skeptoid argument)” in a separate tab on their web browser, it doesn’t burn libraries or imprison dissenters. In other words stop whining.

          • Macky says:

            Who’s whining ? If you don’t understand what’s being said here, not only by myself, then I don’t see why you should bother posting.
            I’ve complimented Brian on his general Skeptoid articles on many occasions. And I certainly understand why he should do away with any new comments because of the drain on resources re reading and editing etc. But the old comments from posters have already been edited and passed, needing no further work done on them.

            Skeptoid as a science-based site is excellent, and its treatment of common myths etc is entertaining and informative.

            But Skeptoid, like mags such as Popular Mechanics etc got itself into contentious events such as TWA 800 and 9-11, and once solid evidence appeared in the discussions that directly contradicted the Official Story (read US govt), Skeptoid abandoned its own mandate for critical analysis and skepticism.
            Worse still, many Skeptoid articles are full of conspiracy theory/theorist bashing and what “they” are supposed to be and do, instead of addressing the subject of the article.

            That has had the effect of diminishing the reputation of Skeptoid as a science-based site for skeptical but critical thinking, reducing Skeptoid (on those contentious subjects) to no more than a supporter of the US govt story, even refusing to discuss the very evidence presented, which skeptics normally call for.

            The posts from those such as myself that (only in that small number of articles) showed with citation after citation from US govt agency files themselves, are now gone from public scrutiny. Visitors cannot read the arguments which should normally be part of a site for skeptics.

            Mags like Popular Mechanics and sites like Wiki were never set up to be skeptics’ forums/sites, but Skeptoid certainly was (along with the science aspect).

            By deleting the past discussions of said contentious issues, some of which have changed the world, Skeptoid is no longer a site for skeptics, for skeptical analysis, and for critical thinking.

            It will remain an excellent educational site for science and relatively unimportant urban myths, and I’m sure that Skeptoid will do a good job in those areas.

            But in critical world-changing events such as 9-11, Skeptoid will remain a supporter for a US govt version of American pseudo-history which has never been proven, and which has much evidence (its own) against it.
            That is all visitors to Skeptoid will read, never having the opportunity to examine posters’ comments both for and against.

            The fact that those comments existed once but do not exist now to public scrutiny (even though readily encouraged in the past) is a form of censorship.

          • Bill Morgan says:

            Macky, well said. The CIA produces Dis-information propaganda and the Media picks it up and sends it out to the people. We have a government that lies to the people.


            However, our Skeptic friends don’t believe this. They think the government tells us the truth. They believe you can trust government reports and documents. They accept Dis-information as fact.

            They won’t even admit that governments engage in Flase Flag events.


            It is not worth your time trying to convince them of this. Their minds are closed on this issue.

          • Noah Dillon says:

            Actually, that’s not what skeptics believe at all. We believe in evidence, of which there is NONE in your links. This is exactly why there are no more comments on Skeptoid Podcast articles. This has nothing to do with the post and is simply bogus ranting nonsense.

          • MBDK says:

            Your overall point is accurate enough, but I must say for fairness, that those poor souls that swallow the outlandish conspiracy “theories” are often misled by sources that DO include a grain of truth, but then the sources embellish and/or falsify details to make it seem like their “theories” have validity. Example: one of Morgan’s sources talked about the British’s Operation Embarrass, which was real enough, but the “source” said Britain blew up ships containing Jewish refugees during WWII. The truth is they did bomb some of the ships, but they were knowingly without cargo (i.e., jews). I am not defending Britain’s actions, but pointing out how such “sources” mix the the truth with their own versions to confuse and recruit believers. It is just too bad people such as Mr. Morgan do not dig a little deeper to figure this stuff out.

          • Bill Morgan says:

            How much Evidence do you need? Do you want a double blind experiment with a Control and Experimental group to see if a False Flag event is true or not true? How many facts do you need? Are eyewitness accounts worthless? In the USS Liberty attack on June 8, 1967 by Israel, there were 34 sailors killed and 171 survivors. ALL of the 171 survivors said the attack was intentional since the ship was clearly sailing a large American Flag and they were under attack by both air and sea. Yet Israel said it was a mistake. They thought is was an Egyptian ship. The American Government believed Israel and took no action. All of the 171 survivors had to sign a pledge saying they would not discuss the incident or face a Court Martial. There have been many books written by survivors saying our Government cover-up the incident and did not tell the truth. The truth was that it was a False Flag attack by Israel. Israel wanted to sink the Liberty and blame it on Egypt and thus get the US into their war on Israel’s side.

          • MBDK says:

            I think it’s hilarious when someone (whom I currently refuse to respond to directly) makes a comment like, “Who’s crying?” and then boo-hoos through the rest of a long pointless rant. Their oblivious mind-set and unwittingly contradictory statements are examples of why comment sections such as this are now no longer being allowed – there is just too much crap to wade through to make it a constructive forum.

          • erique says:

            It seems to me that the conspiracy nuts are seem to fall for the same old fallacies, I think my favourite is Affirming the Consequent, where, for example, an exponent of a conspiracy demonstrates they were right about one thing: “I said Nixon lied about Watergate, Nixon did lie about Watergate, so I am right about hoaxed Moon landings and holographic planes and nano-nuclear-thermite brought down the World Trade centers”…the conspiracy sites are full of this nonsense…one line of truth, often out of context to the subject matter means they are the arbiter of truth.

            As for the continuing charge that comments are a removal of free speech, or a cowards way out of not arguing the case, moderating comments does take time, and if the likes of Macky and Bill actually tried running their own websites, they’d know this…it’s pretty easy to get your jollies off the back of someone else’s effort.

            Macky and Bill, why don’t you start you come together and make your own site…I could do with a laugh…

          • MBDK says:

            I already made the suggestion to Wacky (I imagine the wild antics of The Wacky and Silly Show), but their reality is so warped, they feel their delusions are confirmed when people oppose them. You see, that opposition is “The Man” and/or his influence trying to suppress the “truth”. The hard work of education and thorough research are things for other people to do/experience. So, with only themselves and their ilk to banter the the “truth” about, their sycophantic behavior may feel great to them for a while, but they also need to feel persecuted in order to also feel justified. That is why they bring their forbidden love to forums such as this.

  78. Macky says:

    Well true to form, MBDK is away with the fairies again. Noah continues to cite the lack of evidence for any dissenting opinion.

    Both miss the point I made i.e. “And I certainly understand why he should do away with any new comments because of the drain on resources re reading and editing etc. But the old comments from posters have already been edited and passed, needing no further work done on them.”

    From me, there have been NO conspiracy theories ever posted on Skeptoid. The closest I’ve come to what may be reasonably considered a CT is my evidenced assertion that Roosevelt was certainly NOT surprised by the IJN attack on Pearl Harbour.

    All other skepticism of the Official Govt story of a FEW events such as 9-11 and TWA 800 have simply been criticisms of the US govt version of events. Those criticisms have been evidenced by US govt agencies’ own files, along with critical analysis of what appears to be nothing more than unproven jack-ups of who the perps were supposed to be.

    The true skeptics on Skeptoid (on these matters) have been people such as Bill Morgan and myself, with multiple citations for the resident “skeptics” to examine.

    They haven’t, preferring to engage in ad hominem attacks, while carefully avoiding the very evidence they themselves call for.

    That evidence has now been deleted on the main board, a clear case of removing any dissent from a site which was once a site for considered skepticism, but is now no longer.

    • Bill Morgan says:

      Macky, Agree with your comments. 75 Witnesses saying they saw a 2nd gunman fire a shot from the Grassy Knoll that hit JFK in the right front of the head blowing brain matter out the back of his head which landed on the back of the Limo and splattered on the uniform of the motorcycle cop to the left rear of limo does not convince them there was a conspiracy and a cover up. They discount the 75 eye witnesses as simply being delusional and imagining they saw something that was not there. Yes, yes, the Warren Commission Report is the truth. No gunman on the Grassy Knoll. How much proof do you need that there are deep cover intelligence assets in the Skeptic Society? I figured that one out years ago. Bill

      • Macky says:

        I agree with the trend of your thoughts and posts, Bill. As far as the Warren Commission/Kennedy hit is concerned, I have not proposed any CT, only sound criticism of the investigation, as in TWA 800.

        Once again we have the WC supplied by FBI FD 302 forms, which are blatant openings for anything the FBI wants to change and say. They are “police -state” in nature, and the interviewee has no chance of even checking that his/her statements have been noted correctly.

        Particularly notable is that TWA 800 investigation was supplied by FD 302’s, as was 9-11.

        What is even more notable is that Brian himself criticized (rightly) his “FD302 treatment” on here but 11 months later supports the TWA 800 US govt conclusions of a flawed investigation, completely taken over prematurely by the FBI, based on witness’ testimonies under the same procedure.

        165,000 FD302 “testimonies” were also gathered in the FBI’s investigation of 9-11, which immediately puts EVERY FBI investigation under suspicion of institutionalized perjury on any investigation it ever carried out using those forms and procedures.
        Even if so-called skeptics ignore the rest of the solid evidence (FBI and BTS files) that I’ve provided over the years on these contentious issues.

        The public are now unable to read any of that on the main board, when once it was encouraged in every Skeptoid article.

        If that is what is called skepticism and critical analysis, then some people have very strange ideas about what that is.

        What it really means of course is that as long as one goes along with the Official Story of the US govt, one is an intelligent skeptic.

        But anything against, even with US govt’s own evidence against said Official Story, one changes into a conspiracy nut, even when one has not promoted any CT at all, only skepticism of the US govt story.

        Skeptoid has now deleted all the past comments with the citations etc that supported dissent from Skeptoid’s position.

        Skeptoid is no longer a site for skeptics, plain and simple, on these few contentious issues which comprise American pseudo-history. It’s a site for sycophants who pile in with their ad-hom attacks right on cue the moment they see something against their belief systems re US govt official stories.

  79. Mudguts says:

    Case in point.. the very reason why skeptoid comments were killed off.

  80. erique says:

    It’s funny reading back all this, the likes of Bill and Macky are demonstrating exactly why the comments were removed and stopped…

    You have to laugh…

    • Bill Morgan says:

      Obviously, Skeptics are trying to shut down all criticism of Official Government Propaganda. Skeptics can not accept that the Government lies to them all the time. And the Main Stream Media tell some of the biggest Lies. But Skeptics accept Media lies as facts. Many of the Media lies are written for them by the CIA. The Media just passes on the lies as facts. Sad, very sad.

    • Macky says:

      erique I had to laugh too.

      Some time ago you posted on the Aura thread that when you were “woo-woo” as you put it, you were told that you had a blue-green aura and that you could even see it.
      I asked you several interested questions on your assertion and you have never answered.
      Are you frightened to be seen as still a bit woo-woo ?

      MBDK I know you wont reply directly to my posts because you rather prefer to stand off and throw insults at a safe distance. That says something about your character.

      I also know that Skeptoid and its pro-Official Story supporters will not discuss any FBI or BTS evidence presented nearly 2 years ago, and since, that directly contradicts the US govt story of a few contentious issues.

      But the FD302 FBI (or should we say FIB) procedure throws a blanket doubt on any of its testimony in courts of enquiry regarding tragedies that have changed our lives and the world.

      I was unaware of the FD302 until I read Brian’s account of his own FD302 experience, and it is plain to me that anything that has been investigated by the FBI (for one) under those 302 protocols remains unproven, and under suspicion for perjury, particularly when courageous witnesses have come forward later and stated that their testimony was changed from what they said to the FBI interviewers.

      That is Police State, nothing less, and it is a longstanding procedure that has contributed to American pseudo-history, enforced by law, and carried out by agents that are supposedly civil servants.

      That Skeptoid continues to virtually endorse such a procedure in its support for US govt Official Stories (whether true or not) gained under such conditions is a blatant demonstration of a site which in these FEW matters is certainly not a site for skeptics or for critical analysis.

      The FD302 renders ANY AND ALL investigations of important events in history null and void, a blatant travesty staring the American people in the face for decades, roundly criticized but never changed to a more democratic system of interviewing witnesses in a land that trumpets “freedom and democracy”.

      All that, irrespective of any conspiracy theory, any criticisms of US govt Official Story such as my own, whether the govt story is true or not.

  81. David Festa says:

    I surely miss my friend Macky of Auckland..And the thousands of words.either agreeing or mostly disagreeing on skeptoid.. Though one thing is sure..I’m not skeptical of his tenacity and commitment to his continued participation in skeptoid…Right or wrong Macky of Auckland.. Something to say.and contribute..

    • Noah Dillon says:

      He hangs out on the blog’s comment threads now. Like a bad penny.

      • Macky says:

        It a pity that the opportunities no longer exist for David and myself to team up and give a few of those nasties that appeared on the old Skeptoid a going-over, now that Skeptoid has cancelled its previous invitation to Discuss.

        Worse still, even the archive comments have disappeared as well, mostly I suspect because Skeptoid is steadily proving it’s a site for the promotion of the US govt Official Story/status quo, with several of the points I’ve made and evidence submitted never answered to, or even commented on.

        David and I didn’t agree on one or two issues, but we sure did on others, and he was/is a great team-mate to go into battle with.
        I would choose him anytime.

        • Dale Schroader says:

          Macky, those that have missed you are welcome to their own opinion, but I have come to recognize you as a person who hides behind their distrust of the government to a degree that is delusional. I am not saying the government is even casually trustworthy, but when you rely on blatantly misleading and ultimately unscientific sites to promote your position, your entire discourse is worthless. The science is overwhelmingly in favor of the general findings of the commission. To deny this is to stick your head in the sand and ignore reality. If Macky were to ever discuss these topics in a rational manner (I still recall when he didn’t understand that one of my counterpoints was from one of the very sources he quoted – just from a different URL) I would welcome that. However, logic and critical thinking skills seem to be foreign to him and I hold no great hope that a change will occur.

          • Bill Morgan says:

            The Clinton/Trump political campaign has shown us that the Main Stream Media can not be trusted to tell us the truth and is biased! It is clear and obvious that the MSM favored Clinton and the Democrats and were against Trump and the Republicans. The MSM puts out fake news from anonymous sources that don’t exist. 70% of the American people do not trust the MSM. 80% don’t trust the government to tell us the truth.

            What is troubling to me is that so many so called Skeptics quote government and MSM sources as if what they tell us is true. Sad, very sad.

          • Macky says:

            In answer to Dale Schroader,
            “..a person who hides behind their distrust of the government to a degree that is delusional.”

            I don’t hide behind anything. I have always invited evidence contrary to mine and promised I would change my views if said evidence was better.

            You have even agreed yourself in your next sentence that the govt is not to be trusted.

            “but when you rely on blatantly misleading and ultimately unscientific sites …”

            I will say it again. I do NOT rely on blatantly misleading and ultimately unscientific sites for anything.
            My views are backed up by US govt’s own files, and by mainstream sites namely Wiki (who Brian himself has endorsed in the past).

            “The science is overwhelmingly in favor of the general findings of the commission.”

            Then tell me where. The alleged hijackers were never identifed by science (DNA).
            Science and critical analysis also should engender some skepticism re light aircraft pilots who allegedy flew aircraft types they had never been on before into pin-point targets at speeds normally reserved for high altitudes, hitting them squarely with no overlap of wings or tailplane, on the very first try. Three out of three attempts.

            Infact, at least with Fl77, Hanjour was never proven to even be on the flight.

            Like to answer with some critical analysis and/or science on the above, Dale ?

            “(I still recall when he didn’t understand that one of my counterpoints was from one of the very sources he quoted – just from a different URL)”

            I apologize if I missed it, Please restate said counterpoint.

            Re the Commission, it was criticized by its own Chairs. Another point that nobody on Skeptoid seems to understand is that everything that was published was first vetted by the White House.
            While there certainly would be security reasons, it also leaves the door wide open for anything the US govt wants to convey to the People.

            The whole Conspiracy Theory of 9-11 re who the hijackers actually were is only just that, a US govt contructed, US govt-“proved”, and US govt “confirmed” urban legend.

            There’s not a shred of scientific proof for it.

            You are left with only one option. You either believe the US govt story of who the perps were, or you don’t.
            There’s no proof either way.

          • Bill Morgan says:

            9/11 Exposed-Dr. Steve Pieczenik Reveals the People behind 9/11 with names!


            9/11 was an inside job. The government 9/11 report is a Whitewash.

    • erique says:

      I don’t miss him at all, he has no words of his own, he just regurgitates all the usual nonsense from conspiracy sites…everything he says is someone else’s opinion that I must have read a hundred times before on the original conspiracy sites.

      I think about it logically, there is enough evidence, proof even, of what happened on 9/11, and that is not just supported by government sources, international and independent sources all say the same or similar thing…anyone who can’t see the truth with all the evidence out there cannot be debated with, for they have already decided not to accept any evidence counter to their delusion…their mind is made up.

      It is a kind of very primitive hyper-skepticism, they attach more weighted importance to less significant data because it suits their hypothesis, they don’t understand how to weigh evidence or burden of proof. In a court of law two sides argue their case, the jury weigh up the case, rarely does either prosecution or defence have a case that is 100% incontrovertible, the jury goes with which evidence weighs the case, if that weighting is inconclusive they do not make a decision, if it is not good enough the defendant is innocent. The ‘Twoofer’ jury would listen to the defendant’s evidence that he always carried a 12″ knife to cut his apple in his lunch break, and that he merely turned round and ‘accidentally’ stabbed the victim 17 times.

      The fact is Macky, and all the other conspiracy nuts, always start from a biased point of view, read what they say, a classic is “Government ‘X’ lied about ‘Y’, ergo, government ‘X’ must now also be lying about ‘Z’.”

      Pay them no heed, you can lead a horse to water…

      • Bill Morgan says:

        Why would you trust anything the government says when the CIA lies to the public all the time? Here are just a few of their lies.

        • MBDK says:

          Because, as erique says about Macy and his inability to examine evidence critically, YOU are even worse. Your distrust of the government being used to justify your position consists of at least two logical fallacies – Essentializing and Guilt by Association. Each and every claim MUST be judged on its own merit, but you and Macky ignore this scientific method, and instead support one conspiracy theory with another, using more (as well as the same) logical fallacies. If you ever learn HOW to actually think critically, you will be able to understand the objections that are raised regarding your accusations.

          • Bill Morgan says:

            Please give me proof that the 50 facts are not true? If they are true, then that’s just the tip of the ice berg. If you believe the CIA, that’s your choice. I don’t. They lied to me about Vietnam and I saw 58,000 of my brothers die because of CIA lies about the Gulf of Tonkin incident, and I will never trust them again! And don’t get me started about Operation Phoenix and the 41,000 Vietnamese we assassinated.

          • MBDK says:

            See? You CAN’T disassociate one separate thing from another. That is as illogical as it gets. YOU have lied in the past. I have lied in the past. EVERYONE has lied at times. That doesn’t make everything we say suspect. The CIA, ALL governments and ever Hitler have told the truth, also. Yet YOU illogically dismiss those with prejudice, because you cannot think critically. The FACT remains – everything should be judged on its own merit. You continually fail to understand this BASIC key for remaining objective.

  82. Macky says:

    Just the criticisms of the 9-11 Commission alone on here

    should engender some critical analysis and skepticism, but Skeptoid and its Official Story supporters still swallow a US govt conspiracy theory that has no scientific proof for it whatsoever.

    Strange really when said so-called skeptics demand solid evidence for contrary opinions etc, but not only provide none themselves in support of the Official Story of 9-11, but often resort to personal attacks on those that merely question said OS.

    I still await Dale Shroader’s responses to my answers to his erroneous assertions he made in his opening post.
    Perhaps his assertions (like those of others on here) hold no basis in fact whatsoever.

  83. Macky says:

    MBDK sez

    “Because, as erique says about Macy and his inability to examine evidence critically………”

    Talk about the pot calling the kettle black…………

    • MBDK says:

      Provide a SPECIFIC instance, please.

      • Macky says:

        Kindly examine the departure for Flight 77 on 9-11 day on BTS.

        Up until about 9 months ago BTS showed FL77 as scheduled (0810 from Dulles to LA) but not departing on 9-11.

        To date, the flight is not even shown at all on that day.

        • MBDK says:

          I asked for a specific example where, in any previous post, you think I am not being objective regarding evidence. Instead, you just supply a new claim, which indicates that you have a fundamental failure regarding comprehension.

          Still, with just a quick look at your link, I did my own test. I looked for Northwest Airlines Flight 255.
          This was a McDonnell Douglas MD-82 that crashed shortly after takeoff from Detroit Metropolitan Wayne County Airport on August 16, 1987. The BTS data base returned no results. So, I am sorry, but I cannot accept evidence from a faulty data base as anything more than a bad data base. Of course, I may not have done something correctly to retrieve the desired information, but I did try several times, in earnest. And there could be MANY other reasons for omitting the data, but the bottom line is – data omissions and/or changes are not in and of themselves evidence of anything beyond clerical happenstance. If you looked hard enough, you could find errors/omissions in data for just about anything you want, including every plane flight in the world. None of that, alone, means anything.
          THAT is what being objective is about.

          • Macky says:

            We are discussing 9-11 not a crash that happened at the lower limit of BTS’ records i.e.1987.

            At any rate, enquiries to Flight 255 return a flat out “No data found for the above selection ..” whereas AA Washington Dulles etc on 9-11 day returns a full 18 AA departures, with NO mention (now) of Fl77, so your comparison is inappropriate.

            ” If you looked hard enough, you could find errors/omissions in data for just about anything you want, including every plane flight in the world. None of that, alone, means anything.”

            That’s only a statement of opinion, not firm fact. And let’s get something clear for the nth time, I am NOT proposing any conspiracy theory, only knocking holes in the US govt Official Story of 9-11, primarily Flight 77.

            THEY are the ones who need to prove the story correct, as any CT proposer must.

            They haven’t, because they left too many holes in what appears to be a fabricated tale of Islamic terrorists taking over planes full of people with a few knives and “boxcutters” then flying 3 out of 4 with pin-point accuracy at high speed, something which at the very least should engender some skepticism.

            Now THAT is what being objective is. Present some proof of the US govt 9-11 CT, and we can examine it properly and if your evidence is better than mine, I’ll say so.

            That’s what I’ve always promised in the years I’ve been posting to Skeptoid.

          • MBDK says:

            Well, Wacky is still the same old logically incompetent fool, so I will again refuse to answer to Wacky directly for the foreseeable future. To illustrate his latest failures, Wacky acknowledges my effortless discovery of errata in the data base, yet claims my find is inappropriate to HIS discovery of errata, because it is DIFFERENT errata. *Sheesh*

            Then,W claims a statement I made is opinion and not firm fact, yet my statement included the words, “for just about anything you want” which is an OBVIOUS generalization and NOT a firm fact – that is why I chose those specific words. Any logical person would readily understand this.

            Wacky then says, “THEY are the ones who need to prove the story correct”. AGAIN (yet again) logic is locked outside the room, as “they” (he generalizes by referring to the U.S. Govt., but any specific liability would rest with the NIST) never had to “prove” anything. Their job was to evaluate the evidence and propose the most likely conclusion(s). It is illogical to assume they had to “prove” anything.

            Wacky’s entire diatribe, here and throughout these threads is an example of the logical fallacy known as “Confirmation Bias”. THAT is the EXACT opposite of what being objective is all about.

            His blindness has been pointed out previously and has only been exacerbated in his latest posts. I am through this insignificant gnat…for now…

  84. Macky says:

    Having had my posts attempting to reply to both erique and MBDK deleted, I’ll try again to correct their erroneous statements.

    “…he just regurgitates all the usual nonsense from conspiracy sites…everything he says is someone else’s opinion that I must have read a hundred times before on the original conspiracy sites.”

    I’ll say it again erique. I have never promoted any conspiracy theory on Skeptoid. I do not have to endorse anyone else’s opinion. All I have ever done is criticised the US Govt Official Story using either mainstream site information and/or US govt agency files.

    Please stop posting the same mis-information over and over again. It’s simply not true, and you know it.

    I’m sorry if you can’t see the blatant difference between your Fl255 example, where the ENTIRE PAGE of flights for that day is not available, and the missing Fl77 from an otherwise full page of information of Dulles departures of AA flights on 9-11 day.

    In addition, Fl77 was up until about 9 months ago appearing on said page as scheduled but not departing that day, and had been for some 15 years.

    My friend Dave Festa can back me on that because he and I were arguing over that very entry a few years back. He was referring to that (now missing) entry as we debated over tail numbers etc.

    That BTS record has not been erroneously misplaced, because all the other entries for that day are still intact.
    It has been deliberately removed.

    Btw, your continued insulting diatribe and name-calling does not serve as convincing debate. Your conduct on Skeptoid is a disgrace.

Leave a Reply to Nathan Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *