@quaz0r
Please try not to quote people out of context.
The point was about allocation of time.
the point was most certainly not just about allocation of time. the following statement would make perfect sense on its own:
instead it was qualified with this:
if someone said "hey, i like fried chicken," and someone responded with "Let's be fair - most of us are caucasian adults and i dont like fried chicken," that would be a far different statement than simply "i dont like fried chicken." and the point most certainly would not just be about not liking fried chicken.
Feel free to take sentence fragments out of context and invent your own fictitious motivations for them all you like.
It just makes you look bad.
Of course it was about having enough time to sit through 9 hours of video!
Not only that, it was pointing out that as a working adult, I have other responsibilities which preclude allocating that much time to something which I have already researched in the hopes of discovering a sentence or two I have not already heard - but the most important point was totally lost on you, so here it is again in all it's original and unedited glory:
Let's be fair - most of us are working adults and even one hour of video is a lot to ask somebody to sit through in order to discuss a topic that has been beaten to death for 14 years!
As for my opinions on this topic, I feel much is left unanswered and we will never know the whole truth in our lifetimes.
But there is enough evidence on both sides of this discussion to prevent any firm conclusions being drawn...
Sorry if you are just young and all this is new to you, but I have been through it all over a decade ago - I'm actually shocked you didn't bring up all the questionable data around the supposed plane that hit the Pentagon! And the "us" comment was referring to the fact that it was another member who first complained about the fact that the many hours of video are not helpful - and in fact it works against the possibility of getting others interested in seeing what may be contained therein.
The main justification for my indifference is the indisputable fact that, as I clearly said, "there is enough evidence on both sides of this discussion to prevent any firm conclusions being drawn" which clearly shows that I am not dismissing the possibility it was a hoax, but neither do I dispute that it may well be what "they" say it was.
Due to the stupid long wait times for classified data being released to the public, I reiterate my position that I find the discussion to be pointless since it will never be resolved in our lifetimes! There were others, including moderators in our private moderators forum, who wanted this topic removed - and it was me who stood up for your right to discuss it. Do
not make me regret that decision with personal attacks which are obviously contrived and clearly without merit. If this topic degrades into insults and arguing rather than discussion, it will be locked, and possibly removed.
And don't you dare accuse me of not caring about science - I happen to be a scientist and find that to be a totally groundless and childish insult (if you can't dispute the message, attack the messenger!). Accepting that an area of research will lead nowhere regardless of how many hours of youtube videos one watches is a valid conclusion. Possibly the only valid conclusion possible on this subject.
Anything else is idle speculation, which you are welcome to indulge in to your heart's content. But do not ever place your fantasy ideas about other people's motivations on such a high pedestal that you are willing to proclaim them as fact.