3Rivers Archery Supply
Shooter Question...
Community
Contributors to this thread:
'Ike' (Phone) 05-Oct-17
Lucas 05-Oct-17
NvaGvUp 05-Oct-17
Shuteye 05-Oct-17
IBuild 05-Oct-17
NvaGvUp 05-Oct-17
IBuild 05-Oct-17
Woods Walker 05-Oct-17
sleepyhunter 05-Oct-17
NvaGvUp 05-Oct-17
IBuild 05-Oct-17
IBuild 05-Oct-17
Annony Mouse 05-Oct-17
HA/KS 05-Oct-17
'Ike' (Phone) 06-Oct-17
Amoebus 06-Oct-17
Gray Ghost 06-Oct-17
Annony Mouse 06-Oct-17
Annony Mouse 06-Oct-17
Glunt@work 07-Oct-17
Woods Walker 07-Oct-17
Spike Bull 10-Oct-17
DL 10-Oct-17
Sixby 12-Oct-17
Spike Bull 12-Oct-17
Glunt@work 12-Oct-17
K Cummings 12-Oct-17
Glunt@work 12-Oct-17
Gray Ghost 12-Oct-17
K Cummings 12-Oct-17
PECO 12-Oct-17
Sixby 12-Oct-17
K Cummings 12-Oct-17
WV Mountaineer 12-Oct-17
Glunt@work 12-Oct-17
K Cummings 13-Oct-17
Spike Bull 13-Oct-17
K Cummings 13-Oct-17
WV Mountaineer 13-Oct-17
K Cummings 13-Oct-17
Woods Walker 13-Oct-17
WV Mountaineer 13-Oct-17
K Cummings 13-Oct-17
Sixby 13-Oct-17
K Cummings 13-Oct-17
WV Mountaineer 13-Oct-17
K Cummings 13-Oct-17
Sixby 13-Oct-17
K Cummings 13-Oct-17
Annony Mouse 13-Oct-17
Mad dog 13-Oct-17
bad karma 14-Oct-17
Spike Bull 14-Oct-17
K Cummings 14-Oct-17
K Cummings 14-Oct-17
Whitey 14-Oct-17
K Cummings 14-Oct-17
Spike Bull 14-Oct-17
bad karma 14-Oct-17
Mad dog 14-Oct-17
K Cummings 14-Oct-17
K Cummings 14-Oct-17
Whitey 14-Oct-17
K Cummings 14-Oct-17
Whitey 14-Oct-17
WV Mountaineer 14-Oct-17
Sixby 14-Oct-17
K Cummings 15-Oct-17
Woods Walker 15-Oct-17
K Cummings 15-Oct-17
Sixby 15-Oct-17
K Cummings 15-Oct-17
Sixby 15-Oct-17
Spike Bull 16-Oct-17
K Cummings 16-Oct-17
Sixby 16-Oct-17
K Cummings 16-Oct-17
K Cummings 17-Oct-17
sportoutfitter 17-Oct-17
K Cummings 17-Oct-17
slade 17-Oct-17
K Cummings 17-Oct-17
05-Oct-17
Wonder if he’s a registered Demorat....?!?

From: Lucas
05-Oct-17
Don't know, but don't think that he is a registered anything

From: NvaGvUp
05-Oct-17
Democrat or Republican, he was seriously screwed up and has been for a very long time.

ISIS is claiming he converted to Islam a few months ago, yet the evidence we have to date show his hatred and dementia to goes back far beyond that timeline.

From: Shuteye
05-Oct-17
The police say he wasn't registered to vote.

From: IBuild
05-Oct-17
Oh my , lets make it Political ,

From: NvaGvUp
05-Oct-17
Hey, Sybil,

Your team made it a political issue about five seconds after they heard about it.

Go pound sand, a-hole!

From: IBuild
05-Oct-17
Team ? Would love to here what that means, didn't mean to offend you, sorry once again ,

From: Woods Walker
05-Oct-17
Do we now have #38? Holy chit! He's gonna need a bus!

From: sleepyhunter
05-Oct-17
I'm beginning to think he had help. Which makes me think he was radical left. Just an opinion for now. This man had a lot of hate inside him.

From: NvaGvUp
05-Oct-17
Your "team," as in Pelosi, Bloomberg, Schumer, ad nauseum.

And that's just for starters, a-hole.

From: IBuild
05-Oct-17
Ok ???

From: IBuild
05-Oct-17
Once again I am sorry If I offended , sorry .

Have been told I am retarded , gosh I hate that word , we say special . Not sure what team I am on , Love Jesus , my wife and kid, the USA, my parents, and life in general.

From: Annony Mouse
05-Oct-17

From: HA/KS
05-Oct-17
And if they stayed away from the community forum....

06-Oct-17
Annony, that’s about it...

From: Amoebus
06-Oct-17
Who is Annony Mouse? Was Jack too good for just 2 'n's?

From: Gray Ghost
06-Oct-17

From: Annony Mouse
06-Oct-17

Annony Mouse's Link
Pat awarded me the extra "n" for overall contributions... ;o)

So many questions unanswered...wrong dates of reservation, multiple vehicles, travel history... I can easily see that this event will have questions that will keep conspiracy theorists with lots of materials for years.

Sadly, our government has a record of keeping information sequestered.

From: Annony Mouse
06-Oct-17
ibuild...this video should help you understand and probably answer most of your questions:

From: Glunt@work
07-Oct-17
When someone acts abnormally, drugs are always a consideration. I saw it reported he had been prescribed Diazepam for anxiety. I have no idea if that could have been a factor. Obviously many take it without resulting in planning and executing a massacre.

From: Woods Walker
07-Oct-17
The scariest conclusion to this horrific incident, obviously other than the people who were slaughtered and injured, would be that after all the facts are known and assessed, that we STILL don't have any idea of his motive.

When someone does a mass killing and praises Allah as he does it or otherwise makes a statement about it (verbal or otherwise), at least we know the "why" part....as crazy as it may be. Yes, the victims are still just as dead and injured, but like a bad hit you make on a deer at least you can LEARN something from it and use the knowledge to help prevent something like that from happening again. If you can't then it's a double tragedy.

10-Oct-17

Spike Bull 's Link
An interesting aside.

From: DL
10-Oct-17
Diazepam, qualudes, Valium same thing. normal brain function, which may result in slurred speech, shallow breathing, sluggishness, fatigue, disorientation and lack of coordination or dilated pupils. Higher doses cause impaired memory, judgment and coordination; irritability; paranoia; and thoughts of suicide. Some people can become agitated or aggressive. Using prescription sedatives and tranquilizers with other substances — particularly alcohol — can slow breathing, or slow both the heart and respiration, and possibly lead to death.

Mix that with alcohol and no telling what someone could do. Many people get on mind controlling meds and then stop. Bad things can happen. Self medication by mixing drugs and alcohol or increasing doses are dangerous too.

From: Sixby
12-Oct-17
I don't know what but I know who motivated him. Saten. Probably concieved within the Obama Presidency so that when Hillery won this would happen and she would immediately push for complete disarmament . The shooter or shooters may have just gone through with the plan to see what would happen. But pure evil was behind it all. Body count never mattered to socialists as long as they get what they want. These are God-less, lawless murderers and this is a war being carried out by powers, principalities and spiritual wickedness in high places./ Trump was a gift of God Himself and turned their plan upside down. Hense the intense hatred and vitriol coming from the left.

God bless, Steve

12-Oct-17
I agree, Sixby.

From: Glunt@work
12-Oct-17
If he was just wacko and acted alone, motive isn't a big deal. Whatever twisted reasoning he had died with him. If he wasn't crazy or didn't act alone, motive means a lot. Premeditated murder is usually done for a reason. Financial gain, revenge, a cause, etc.. First question is who benefits.

From: K Cummings
12-Oct-17
"Probably concieved within the Obama Presidency so that when Hillery won this would happen and she would immediately push for complete disarmament . The shooter or shooters may have just gone through with the plan to see what would happen."

I have a hard time deciphering most of what you write Sixby, but are you suggesting that this shooting was carried out so Hillary could push for total disarmament if she got elected, but since she didn't, they went ahead with it anyway...just to see what would happen?

If so, you're even more nucking futs than I thought.

KPC

From: Glunt@work
12-Oct-17
I'm not a conspiracy guy, but I also know that people have no problem killing other people over things far less important than gaining political power or control. Millions of people have been killed in the quest to grow or maintain political power or further an ideology. We seem to have an easier time understanding a guy killing another guy over a $200 drug deal gone bad.

From: Gray Ghost
12-Oct-17
Sixby,

Why do you assume Paddock was a socialist? And are you saying socialists are only capable of this type evil behavior? I think you know better.

I'm reading Paddock had no political affiliation. Heck, as far as we know he could have just hated country music.

Matt

From: K Cummings
12-Oct-17
"Why do you assume Paddock was a socialist?"

Because that's what fits into the kooky conspiracy theory template he chooses to use.

KPC

From: PECO
12-Oct-17
What does Alex Jones say?

From: Sixby
12-Oct-17
There are pics of Paddock at a Sanders rally. Good indicator. KPC. Your attitude is not worth commenting on except for the fact that you are not able to get the tenor of what I write. I'm neither that deep nor that ignorant. You simply wish to express your superior intellect. In doing this you fail to impress or encourage decent conversation.

God bless, Steve

From: K Cummings
12-Oct-17
"There are pics of Paddock at a Sanders rally."

Link?

KPC

12-Oct-17
Kevin, before I got to high and mighty about this, I believe I'd check myself if I were you. On a turn note, I'll add that if you truly believe that this and, most other actions were simple coincidences of madness, you are the wack job you accuse others of.

THERE are ZERO coincidences in these actions. ZERO. What truly inspired it was evil. What's behind that evil is unknown at this point. But, to constantly claim critical thinking as your defense over others that are looking for the answers, makes the joke on you. There has to be a reason these actions keep happening. There has to be a reason that the "shooter" picked the weapons he did. The time he choose. Nothing about this is an accident of results. I know it makes you comfortable to insinuate other wise but, no matter the cause, it has a reason. And, so far, Steve's theory makes a lot sense to anyone willing to realize that everyday, thousands of people die worldwide because someone wanted them too for a personal, political gain. And, Americans are no longer exempt from these actions due to what sixby stated.

From: Glunt@work
12-Oct-17
We have never been exempt. The murder rate in America has dropped a lot in the last 30 years. We are about at the same rate we were in the 50s. Doesn't make these mass shootings any less tragic but it seems most folks think the odds of being killed are climbing and way higher than the past. I suppose reporting that we are getting safer or status quo doesn't boost ratings.

From: K Cummings
13-Oct-17
"THERE are ZERO coincidences in these actions. ZERO. What truly inspired it was evil."

Of course it was "evil," nobody ever said otherwise. What I'm taking issue with, and will continue to take issue with, is the notion that everything bad that happens in this world is some grand conspiracy involving the Clintons, the Obamas, George Soros, the commies, the globalists, the eGOP (whatever that is) or any number of other scapegoats that our local conspiracy theorists pin everything on.

All I ask for is a little proof. Where are the pictures of Paddock at a Sanders rally?

Where is the proof of any of the things that were posted on another thread?

"I wonder??? Whatever happened to the shooter at the Bellagio? I wonder why the room numbers were edited out of the door pics. I wonder why we are not hearing about any of the people that were on the same floor? I wonder why the FBI agent in charge is the son in law of John Podesta? I wonder why there are so many reports of the shooting at the Bellagio but the press and the police are not even mentioning it even though the front doors were blown out and people at the bar threw themselves on the floor and there are multiple vidios of the lockdown following? I wonder why the sheriff has an earpiece with someone in it telling him what to say and monitering him? I wonder why street cams show no police activity until 11:07 , and no ambulances until after 2 am? I wonder why the police and FBI are continually revamping the story. I wonder why the body pic shows a setup rifle on a tripod over the leg of the shooter who supposedly shot himself in the mouth? I wonder why the Australians next door to the room report seeing multiple bodies and multiple shooters ? Lot to wonder about and I'm betting one 67 yr old alcholic did it all by himself when it all shakes out."

Simply regurgitating things you read on some conspiracy theory website doesn't constitute proof.

KPC

13-Oct-17
Neither does ignoring evidence and denying facts,old! When you finally figure out what EGOP is maybe you will be capable of understanding some things we all see.

From: K Cummings
13-Oct-17

K Cummings's embedded Photo
K Cummings's embedded Photo
WV M:

For example, I just took a few of the things mentioned and did a little research of my own.

1. To my knowledge, no pictures exist showing Paddock at a Bernie Sanders rally. That is why I asked for a link. If there was one, it would literally be plastered all over the internet. It's not, because it likely doesn't exist. If it did, it would be pure gold for anyone trying to tie this guy to any political ideology.

2. FBI agent in charge of the investigation is not John Podesta's son in law.

3. Or how about the notion that the room number was edited out of the pictures? (see above)

I could go on, but I have neither the time or the inclination to investigate every other piece of conspiracy fodder that can nether be proven or disproven, like how the sheriff was being told exactly what to say and being monitored via an earpiece.

So yes, anyone is welcome to believe these "facts" if they wish, but make no mistake...they are not "facts" at all. Anyone willing to engage in a little, yes...critical thinking, would realize that much of this garbage is nothing but fantasy that keeps the paranoid conspiracy theorists frothing at the mouth.

KPC

13-Oct-17
Kevin, I do not know anything about the examples you just quoted. However, I watched several initial news reports saying that the guy's facebook page showed his convictions to Bernie, the political left, and any thing anti Trump. But, guess what, his facebook page is no longer available to determine that. Is that true? I don't know and, may never due to not having access to see for myself. I also understand that his page has been removed from facebook according to news reports. Is that true? I think so. Many reports have stated that. WHY would that happen? I'm not a conspiracy nut but, there is reasons these things have been removed. And, being the investigators are begging for leads here, it wasn't for the integrity of the investigation.

I find your assumptions of being the critically thinking person here incomplete, because it appears to me that you are ready to digest anything other than the fact this guy could very possibly acted on the behalf of a political interest. I summarize that isn't the case at all due to your refusal not to analyze everything but, to basically discredit anything at this point is not critically thinking. I understand your examples as reason to discredit the claims you did. But, I don't recall Steve ever making the assumptions you exampled. And, I for one do not put one single thing past a political power financed by the people she has been financed by. Her deeds. Her willingness to compromise her character.

And, I find this unexplained mass shooting, conducted by an otherwise ignorant individual concerning his weapons choice, at a very convenient time for the left, just to random for its own good. If this guy had truly wanted to kill people as he "insinuated" with this action, with his financial means, he could have killed millions much more effectively. I could go on as to other reasons I am leaning this way in my own mind. But, the point is made. No one knows Jack Squat right now. And aside from the ridiculous, nothing is off the table.

From: K Cummings
13-Oct-17
"Kevin, I do not know anything about the examples you just quoted. However, I watched several initial news reports saying that the guy's facebook page showed his convictions to Bernie, the political left, and any thing anti Trump."

Exactly my point WV M.

Those early reports were talking about the wrong "guy." Those initial reports falsely accused Geary Danley as being the shooter, when it was actually Stephen Paddock. It was Danley's FB page, not Paddock's. Slade posted that false information within hours of the shooting.

My assumptions are not incomplete because I'm not assuming anything. "Critical thinking" requires more than assumptions. I don't know what to believe...yet. I've said that numerous times.

Assumptions are assumptions, theories are theories, but "facts" require proof, and that is what I am taking issue with. When people post theories and assumptions and call them facts, they need to be called out.

That is what I have done.

KPC

From: Woods Walker
13-Oct-17
Here's what we know FOR SURE..........

1. 59 people were killed.

2. A man named Stephen Paddock died from a gunshot would in the room at the Mandaly Bay hotel where the gunfire came from.

3. A security guard was wounded by shots that came through Paddock's room door.

4. Nancy Pelosi and Diane Feinstein went into an orgasmic coma from the joy of knowing that they had 59 fresh graves they could dance on to promote gun confiscation.....and they didn't even wait until there were actual graves to dance on!

And that's it. We need Sherlock Holmes for this one.

13-Oct-17
Did Steve imply any of these examples you used? Or, were you just expressing how ridiculous you thought his train of thought was?

FWIW, I wasn't basing that on Slade's post. I was basing it on FOX news. Like I said, we really don't know do we? I haven't heard it in a week or so. But, I haven't been looking for myself because at this point, all we will know is what the investigators want us to know. Which seems to be changing daily. I'm not suggesting their are ulterior motives for that. But, I'm not going to be blinded by just taking press reports, approved for public consumption, as being the gospel.

Do you have some insight to the investigation privy from the rest of us? If not, what you are doing is no different than any one else at this point. Albeit, it might be with a little more discretion but, exploring options none the less. So, we are back where we began. We are all looking for the answers. And, all any of us have to work with to derive our train of thought, is what someone with security clearance thinks we deserve to know.

I'm not picking on you. I actually admire your ability to be critical of any and all angles, in every topic. However, I have watched you make these claims over and over while using no better "facts" than those you are critical of. We simply do not know what is going on. And, basing any opinion of this shooting, solely on what you can find about it on the internet, doesn't elevate yours above anyone else's at this point. God Bless

From: K Cummings
13-Oct-17
"Did Steve imply any of these examples you used?"

Of course he did, in another thread. That's why I responded to them.

"I wonder??? Whatever happened to the shooter at the Bellagio? I wonder why the room numbers were edited out of the door pics. I wonder why we are not hearing about any of the people that were on the same floor? I wonder why the FBI agent in charge is the son in law of John Podesta? I wonder why there are so many reports of the shooting at the Bellagio but the press and the police are not even mentioning it even though the front doors were blown out and people at the bar threw themselves on the floor and there are multiple vidios of the lockdown following? I wonder why the sheriff has an earpiece with someone in it telling him what to say and monitering him? I wonder why street cams show no police activity until 11:07 , and no ambulances until after 2 am? I wonder why the police and FBI are continually revamping the story. I wonder why the body pic shows a setup rifle on a tripod over the leg of the shooter who supposedly shot himself in the mouth? I wonder why the Australians next door to the room report seeing multiple bodies and multiple shooters ? Lot to wonder about and I'm betting one 67 yr old alcholic did it all by himself when it all shakes out. God bless, guys"

Did you think I just made them up?

"We simply do not know what is going on."

That IS a fact. Pretty much the ONLY one we know so far.

KPC

From: Sixby
13-Oct-17
Interesting that such an intelligent being that is so enlightened that he can call names is so blind that he cannot see question marks. I wonder? That is not a statement indicating fact. It is a question. This said, I watched the sheriff attempting to have a mental breakdown today and shifting his eyes all over the place. What in the world is going on? Are they going to change the story every day while they like KPC attack the questioners and refuse to answer. I might see a conspiracy because the last time I saw a cat it had four legs and a long tail and purred. This horrible murder is looking like a conspiracy because the leos are making it look that way. God bless, Steve

From: K Cummings
13-Oct-17
Nice try Sixby, but let's look at what you actually said.

"I wonder why the room numbers were edited out of the door pics."

Notice that you didn't say that you wonder IF the room numbers were edited, you wondered why they WERE edited. You were stating in fact that they were. They were not.

Or...

"I wonder why the FBI agent in charge is the son in law of John Podesta?"

Again, you didn't say I wonder IF, you said I wonder why the FBI agent in charge IS the son in law of John Podesta. You stated that he was in fact the son in law of John Podesta. He is not.

Or...

" I wonder why the sheriff has an earpiece with someone in it telling him what to say and monitering him? "

You didn't say you wondered IF someone was telling him what to say, you said he had an earpiece in with someone in it telling him what to say. You, or anyone else would have absolutely no way of knowing that, yet you stated it as a fact.

Shall I go on?

KPC

13-Oct-17
No, I didn't think you made them up. I asked a question. A question I certainly couldn't answer by critically analyzing this thread. A question that was derived by not knowing what was said in another thread. Don't take offense to someone asking you to defend your position. Because you have zero problems doing the same to others. And, no one is above that. God Bless

From: K Cummings
13-Oct-17
"No, I didn't think you made them up. I asked a question. A question I certainly couldn't answer by critically analyzing this thread. A question that was derived by not knowing what was said in another thread. Don't take offense to someone asking you to defend your position. Because you have zero problems doing the same to others. And, no one is above that. God Bless "

Actually you could deduce that by "critically analyzing" this thread. After all, I posted Sixby's direct quote from the other thread, when you and I were specifically discussing things he had said, and I even went so far as specifically saying that the quote was taken from another thread. (see my 4th post on this thread)

I don't take offense at anyone asking me to support my position. I never have. I have no problem owning and clearly supporting what I post. It is precisely why I use direct quotations so often. However, I do take offense when someone takes me to task for saying something that I haven't or not saying something that I clearly have.

KPC

From: Sixby
13-Oct-17
You seem unable to admit any wrong. I said there are questions and I punctuated with question marks. The pics I saw of the staged room with the guns ect show the room number either blacked out or taped over with black tape. If a room was staged it would not be the real shooter room. This would mean that there is a lot in the real room that is not available to public. That would be the idea of staging a room. Would it not?

God bless, Steve

From: K Cummings
13-Oct-17
Show what I posted that is wrong and I will openly admit it. Yes you were asking questions, but you were asking them about facts not in evidence, or about total falsehoods.

As to speculating about a "staged" room, I'm not going to do that. That's the point. I'll leave that up the conspiracy theorists and kooks. It took me about 30 seconds to find a picture of the room, with the number intact. I provided proof. Can you provide a link to a picture with the room number edited out or covered over? Or how about that John Podesta's son in law is the FBI agent in charge? Or can you provide proof that someone was telling the sheriff what to say via his ear piece?

KPC

From: Annony Mouse
13-Oct-17

Annony Mouse's Link
Interesting view...

Unless the FBI final report provides all the evidence and information collected, this shooting may well be another chapter in the book of conspiracies aka the Kennedy assignation..

From: Mad dog
13-Oct-17
Don't you LOVE PEEPS that lay back and ridicule and shoot down EVERY theory WITHOUT forwarding a plausible one of their own? We are waiting for YOUR theories whilst we get ZERO Intel out of the MSM OR YOU!! patiently waiting . Taking a VERY DEEP breath.....YOU!!!!!! ARROGANT ASSHOLES....TELL US.....WHASSUP? Edify Us... mad Dog

From: bad karma
14-Oct-17
Are you really defending unsupportable corral dust conspiracy theories based upon easily disproved assumptions?

14-Oct-17
There are several disproved assumptions in among some unproven assumptions and a scattering of facts. It is still early and facts are to be determined.

kpc, what was the point of that picture?

From: K Cummings
14-Oct-17
"Don't you LOVE PEEPS that lay back and ridicule and shoot down EVERY theory WITHOUT forwarding a plausible one of their own? We are waiting for YOUR theories whilst we get ZERO Intel out of the MSM OR YOU!! patiently waiting . Taking a VERY DEEP breath.....YOU!!!!!! ARROGANT ASSHOLES....TELL US.....WHASSUP? Edify Us... mad Dog"

You can stomp, yell, swear, and call people names but the one reality still remains. Having a "plausible theory" is one thing. Building, or advancing one on demonstrably false "facts." (or so they are called by some) is a yet another. That is what people are taking issue with.

If people choose to believe this tragedy was the beginning of the zombie apocalypse, that's fine. That's your prerogative. However, if you attempt to support that "theory" with demonstrably false "facts," expect some pushback.

Is that edification enough, or is that a little too nuanced for you?

KPC

From: K Cummings
14-Oct-17

K Cummings's embedded Photo
K Cummings's embedded Photo
""Don't you LOVE PEEPS that lay back and ridicule and shoot down EVERY theory WITHOUT forwarding a plausible one of their own?"

Ironically, you've pretty much just described the process that some people here literally despise...and for obvious reason.

The mere mention of it offends them to the core.

KPC

From: Whitey
14-Oct-17
I wouldn’t call it critical thinking beacuse there is a modus opperandi. Crtitcal thinking is pure in nature and typically operates outside of group status. Every group has a handful of people that still want to belong to the group but they propose contrary or antagonistic positions. It’s purpose is part of the social ranking process within the group where knowledge and information are considered currency. True critical thinking may put you outside the group permanently and very few people can survive the social isolation. They typically leave to join another group. In the internet age you can find a pro or a con for almost any side of a topic . Absolutes are not debated often. People believe something first then go look for evidence to support thier position. There is always bias involved in that process. It’s a very complicated process to weed the bias out even scientifically.

From: K Cummings
14-Oct-17
"I wouldn’t call it critical thinking beacuse there is a modus opperandi."

Critical thinking IS the modus operandi Whitey, by definition.

Knowledge and information IS currency. Always has been...always will be. Those who possess it have the power. Those who lack it, desperately want it...often to the point of fabricating it.

"True critical thinking may put you outside the group permanently and very few people can survive the social isolation."

True.

KPC

14-Oct-17
"Those who lack it, desperately want it...often to the point of fabricating it." OH! Kind of like the way you posted that picture to "prove" that the room numbers were there! Except that you really cannot tell what that room number is because there is an obstruction right up the center of it obscuring the room number. One can tell that is probably the 32nd floor, but actually there is no way for any of us to verify that picture. Hell, it may actually have been staged, or even in a different hotel for that matter!

Before you go galloping off with another unsupportable tirade, I am not saying I believe it is, just that you cannot prove anything with that photo. Which is one of the reasons you wont answer the question, kpc.

From: bad karma
14-Oct-17
It's a shame, Spike, you won't hold yourself to even within an order of magnitude of the burden of proof you want to hold KPC to.

From: Mad dog
14-Oct-17
Pardon us KPC & GG....it is such an honor to be in the presence of such erudition! How DARE anyone even TRY to debate you guys? So...tell us about the MENSA meetings. Mad Dog

From: K Cummings
14-Oct-17
"It's a shame, Spike, you won't hold yourself to even within an order of magnitude of the burden of proof you want to hold KPC to."

Not to mention that the person advancing the kooky theory has the burden of proof to support the theory. All I did was show that the room number (which anyone with average eyesight or a decent computer monitor could easily see is 32-134) was NOT "edited out" of the picture.

Where is the picture that shows that it WAS "edited out?" Apparently that's not required to advance the kooky theory and it's up to everyone else to prove the negative.

How would you like a legal system where the defendant had to prove his innocence.

:)

KPC

From: K Cummings
14-Oct-17
Mad dog:

I don't know about GG but I've never been to a MENSA meeting. I'm not anywhere near smart enough to be a MENSA member. Fortunately (or unfortunately for some) this is high school stuff.

KPC

From: Whitey
14-Oct-17
Critical thinking can only be the modus in the absence of bias. The modus here is to make the other guy look stupid and elevate your knowledge currency. So you have a bias and therefore don’t meet the criteria of a critical thinker. You only look for enough information to accomplish that goal. A critical thinker only seeks truth or to push the possibility of truth closer on a given subject. I would call what you are doing is attempting to be more of pragmatic thinking. But just barely.

From: K Cummings
14-Oct-17
I do have a bias Whitey but your connotation suggests that it is an unfair one. It is not. My posting record here clearly shows that I have a bias against conspiracy theories that cannot be supported by fact, regardless of who posts them. I'm very consistent in this regard.

It just so happens that the vast majority of these theories seem to be posted by the same half dozen or so posters.

KPC

From: Whitey
14-Oct-17
Not debating the right or wrong that’s between you guys. Debating critical thinking, to claim it there can be no bias is all. I don’t like conspiracy theories or group think either.

14-Oct-17
KPC, point made. On both ends

From: Sixby
14-Oct-17
KPC , I never ever ever feel the need to prove anything to you. A question is a question. Those were questions I actually have. I feel no need to prove them , They are questions. Disprove them . As far as the room number is concerned the pic I saw was purported to be the room that was staged. Not the actual room of the shooting. The side was blown out and rifles laying on the floor and shell casings and the room number blotted out. My question was why was the room number blotted out. My answer to that is that it is not the shooters room but a staged room. It raises a question. Why was a room staged using different hangings., different furniture arrangement ect with the room number blotted out. The pic you show does not have outside damage and I make an assumption that it could be the shooter room or may not be. SAme assumption you would make on the other room. On the other hand you seem to be so argumentative that it gives the impression that you think yourself to be so superior to everyone else that you even want to argue about critical thinking. It comes on as being an anti social little man syndrome. Critical think that. You have time in your blind to do that. God bless, Steve

From: K Cummings
15-Oct-17
Sixby:

Why do you post when you're drunk?

KPC

From: Woods Walker
15-Oct-17
C'mon guys.....go get a room or something! This lovefest has been going on for THREE DAYS now!!!

From: K Cummings
15-Oct-17
"C'mon guys.....go get a room or something!"

I have to admit WW, that one made me chuckle. More for the irony than the humor though.

After all, when you think about it, each thread is it's own room. We open each door by clicking on the title. Last I knew, none were compulsory.

:)

KPC

From: Sixby
15-Oct-17
I do not drink any alcohol at all,. I do not take any drugs and for you to insinuate such is to indicate that you are so eaten up with your own pride and self indulgence that you think that anything you can do to put any other person down is ok. Its not, its an antisocial act. You sir are the loser. Big Period. You need to resort to name calling and insinuation. That is a losing side in any debate. Debate, something I hate and am not good at but something you not only love but make your own rules up as you go in order in any way to subject what you falsely percieve to be an adversary, Which I am not , on top of neither drinking or taking drugs. IMHO you are crossing some lines here and I'm done so you win. Again I do not need to beat you in a discussion like you seem to need to be a winner. So go , winner, Talk to yourself.

God bless, Steve

From: K Cummings
15-Oct-17
"I do not drink any alcohol at all,. I do not take any drugs and for you to insinuate such is to indicate that you are so eaten up with your own pride and self indulgence that you think that anything you can do to put any other person down is ok. Its not, its an antisocial act. You sir are the loser."

I wasn't insinuating anything Sixby. I was jut asking a question. Didn't you see the question mark?

I was just asking a question, in the "EXACT" same way you were "asking" if the FBI agent in charge was the son in law of John Podesta.

Or the EXACT same way you were "asking if the room numbers were edited out of pictures.

Or the EXACT same way you were "asking" if the sheriff was being told what to say via an earphone.

Let me refresh your memory. These are the questions you asked:

"I wonder why the room numbers were edited out of the door pics." "I wonder why the FBI agent in charge is the son in law of John Podesta?"

"I wonder why the sheriff has an earpiece with someone in it telling him what to say and monitering him?"

And here is what I asked:

"Why do you post when you're drunk?"

Surely you can see that I wasn't insinuating anything. I was just asking a question...just like you were, sir. Thank you for making my point for me.

KPC

From: Sixby
15-Oct-17
You make a point though you personally pointed it at me as a statement when I was actually asking questions I really had. As I stated , my fortey is not debating./ You win.

God bless, Steve

16-Oct-17
Yep! He's a weiner!

Ever notice your sources are "from the internet" and therefore insubstantial but his sources, also from the internet, are always unimpeachable!?!

From: K Cummings
16-Oct-17
I don't necessarily expect you to agree with this Sixby, but pointing out demonstrably false statements and theories is not about you, it's not about me, and it's not about "winning," it's about seeking the truth.

A falsehood posed as a question, or a question that requires one to first accept a falsehood, is no less a falsehood. It's akin to the age old question: "Are you still beating your wife?"

On a side note, I've never had a problem supporting my arguments (or at least attempting to). If I'm advancing a false narrative, I would hope someone would call me on it. However, ad hominem attacks, like the one following your last post, are most often nothing more than a diversionary tactic in an attempt to mask an unsupportable argument.

KPC

From: Sixby
16-Oct-17
I don't necessarily expect you to agree with this Sixby.

You just said something I do agree with.

God bless, Steve

From: K Cummings
16-Oct-17
That's great Sixby. It warms my heart knowing we could finally agree on something.

KPC

From: K Cummings
17-Oct-17

K Cummings's embedded Photo
K Cummings's embedded Photo
Came across these while researching something else and thought others would appreciate the clarification.

KPC

17-Oct-17
In all fairness KPC, the question mark doesn't make it a question about his posting, but his posting while drunk. May be semantics but that's the way I took. You insinuated he was drunk. Just sayin.

From: K Cummings
17-Oct-17
" In all fairness KPC, the question mark doesn't make it a question about his posting, but his posting while drunk. May be semantics but that's the way I took. You insinuated he was drunk. Just sayin."

You're exactly right sportoutfitter. That was the whole point of me asking the question the way I did. I was specifically trying to illustrating a point to Sixby.

When he asked this question...

"I wonder why the FBI agent in charge is the son in law of John Podesta?"

...notice how the question automatically assumes that the FBI agent is John Podesta's son in law. The question was not IS the FBI agent in charge JP's son in law? The question was WHY is JP's son in law the FBI agent in charge?

Compare that to my question...

"Why do you post when you're drunk?"

My question is not asking IF Sixby is posting while he is drunk. I already assumed that. The question is WHY is he posting when he is drunk.

The point was, both questions were based on a total falsehood.

KPC

From: slade
17-Oct-17
“current flood of sanctimonious denial and condemnation that now crashes upon these shores of rectitude in gloppy tides of bullsh*t righteousness.”

From: K Cummings
17-Oct-17
Wow, that's a good quote Slade.

It would probably be even better if you knew what half the words meant.

KPC

  • Sitka Gear