Mechagodzilla
Tank
- Joined
- Aug 14, 2003
- Messages
- 6,973
- Reaction score
- 0
Inspired by William Shatner's Two-Week Challenge, I have also decided to try clearing something out.
Hence, (drumroll):
The Clarky Challenge!
FACTQ: Frequently Asked "Clarky, The" Questions
What is a clarky?
"clarky003", AKA "the clarky" is more-or-less the official figurehead of the "9/11 Truth Movement" in this forum (and possibly others). If there is a 9/11 conspiracy theory, there is a good chance the clarky believes in it.
Example: In a recent thread, the clarky has made statements to the effect that Al Qaeda does not exist.
Stop making fun of the clarky!
Although that's not a question, it is important to note that the purpose of The Clarky Challenge is not to ridicule.
The purpose of The Clarky Challenge is threefold:
1) Reducing spam by fostering cohesiveness and coherence in the (normally scattered, repetitive and disparate) clarky-based claims, which tend to derail most every thread on the subject of the war on terrorism.
2) A comprehensive and direct refutation of said claims.
3) Eventual ridicule, in the event that any be warranted upon the completion of goals (1) and (2).
I am now intrigued. What is The Clarky Challenge?!
I'm glad that you asked!
Fundamental Aspects of The Clarky Challenge
On the basis that there is no such thing as "too much fact" in rational discourse, and emphasizing the importance of presentational composure in important matters, I am kindly asking the following of the clarky:
1) A comprehensive listing in this thread of his (the clarky's) conclusions, as well as (where at all possible) the evidence and inferences (etc.) from which said conclusions were drawn.
That is the only truly important request, but some (largely optional) factors are involved therein:
a) That care be taken, on the part of the clarky, to ensure the validity of his sources and deductions (this is optional, but appreciated by all).
b) That care be taken, on the part of the clarky, to detail the above in the conventional style of The Queen's English, Colonial English or some amalgamation of the above (this is optional, but appreciated by all).
c) That evidence, inferences, conclusions and/or other relevant information not be withheld for use in a later argument (this is somewhat implicit in the comprehensiveness of the request).
d) That evidence and inferences be presented uncluttered, to as much a degree as is possible through means of summary, specificity and use of quotes (this is optional, but appreciated by all).
e) That important terms presented be defined, where necessary (this is optional, but appreciated by all).
2) That we conduct ourselves by the following rules of conduct and propriety:
a) It is implicit that, although advices can be given by concerned third parties (preferably through Private Message in an effort to keep this thread uncluttered), the list of claims be compiled by the clarky alone. Please understand that, for the intended goals of comprehensiveness and conciseness to be acheived, the potentially infinite number of third-party postings cannot be analysed in detail and will be disregarded.
b) It is asked that name-calling and brouhaha be kept at the door.
c) That The Clarky Challenge be taken for the serious matter that it is and treated accordingly.
3: That the following resources be considered in advance, as they may prove useful to the clarky:
-911myths.com (most importantly, the papers of Dr Frank Greenings).
-The Logical Fallacy Thread (and further resources listed therein).
-Wikipedia (reccomended topics: Scientific Method, Pseudoscience, Logic, Empiricism, List of Logical Fallacies.)
-Others.
(Note that advance reading is optional, but appreciated.)
4: Do your best and prove the world wrong! Our freedom depends upon it!
Hence, (drumroll):
The Clarky Challenge!
FACTQ: Frequently Asked "Clarky, The" Questions
What is a clarky?
"clarky003", AKA "the clarky" is more-or-less the official figurehead of the "9/11 Truth Movement" in this forum (and possibly others). If there is a 9/11 conspiracy theory, there is a good chance the clarky believes in it.
Example: In a recent thread, the clarky has made statements to the effect that Al Qaeda does not exist.
The clarky also does not believe he is acting in a way that is unscientific and/or illogical.clarky003. Where possible said:
As such, despite generally poor grammar, I see the clarky as the most authoritative and vocal conspiracy theorist in this particular section of the information superhighway.clarky003 said:
Stop making fun of the clarky!
Although that's not a question, it is important to note that the purpose of The Clarky Challenge is not to ridicule.
The purpose of The Clarky Challenge is threefold:
1) Reducing spam by fostering cohesiveness and coherence in the (normally scattered, repetitive and disparate) clarky-based claims, which tend to derail most every thread on the subject of the war on terrorism.
2) A comprehensive and direct refutation of said claims.
3) Eventual ridicule, in the event that any be warranted upon the completion of goals (1) and (2).
I am now intrigued. What is The Clarky Challenge?!
I'm glad that you asked!
Fundamental Aspects of The Clarky Challenge
On the basis that there is no such thing as "too much fact" in rational discourse, and emphasizing the importance of presentational composure in important matters, I am kindly asking the following of the clarky:
1) A comprehensive listing in this thread of his (the clarky's) conclusions, as well as (where at all possible) the evidence and inferences (etc.) from which said conclusions were drawn.
That is the only truly important request, but some (largely optional) factors are involved therein:
a) That care be taken, on the part of the clarky, to ensure the validity of his sources and deductions (this is optional, but appreciated by all).
b) That care be taken, on the part of the clarky, to detail the above in the conventional style of The Queen's English, Colonial English or some amalgamation of the above (this is optional, but appreciated by all).
c) That evidence, inferences, conclusions and/or other relevant information not be withheld for use in a later argument (this is somewhat implicit in the comprehensiveness of the request).
d) That evidence and inferences be presented uncluttered, to as much a degree as is possible through means of summary, specificity and use of quotes (this is optional, but appreciated by all).
e) That important terms presented be defined, where necessary (this is optional, but appreciated by all).
2) That we conduct ourselves by the following rules of conduct and propriety:
a) It is implicit that, although advices can be given by concerned third parties (preferably through Private Message in an effort to keep this thread uncluttered), the list of claims be compiled by the clarky alone. Please understand that, for the intended goals of comprehensiveness and conciseness to be acheived, the potentially infinite number of third-party postings cannot be analysed in detail and will be disregarded.
b) It is asked that name-calling and brouhaha be kept at the door.
c) That The Clarky Challenge be taken for the serious matter that it is and treated accordingly.
3: That the following resources be considered in advance, as they may prove useful to the clarky:
-911myths.com (most importantly, the papers of Dr Frank Greenings).
-The Logical Fallacy Thread (and further resources listed therein).
-Wikipedia (reccomended topics: Scientific Method, Pseudoscience, Logic, Empiricism, List of Logical Fallacies.)
-Others.
(Note that advance reading is optional, but appreciated.)
4: Do your best and prove the world wrong! Our freedom depends upon it!
