Pseudoskeptic Mark Roberts checks out at JREF

Hi, Folks.

This will be my last post in this subforum. I'll be posting in other subfora and will be getting involved in other skeptical pursuits, but will still be available for 9/11 questions, interviews, debates, etc. if need be, so don't hesitate to let me know if I can help.

Thanks for putting up with my aggressive style for all this time. I know it doesn't make for pleasant reading, but it's been important to me not to use kid gloves on these revelers in ignorance and these apologists for the terrorists who killed my neighbors.


Here is Dylan Avery's response to that last statement:

"What a load of empty rhetoric. The Jersey Girls lost their HUSBANDS, and they're the principle driving force behind the existence of the Truth Movement. Stop playing the victim, Mark. Everybody lost their neighbors and their loved ones, and a majority of those family members are demanding answers just as much as we are. Just because you have an axe to grind doesn't grant you the right to play crusader and use the victims' pain and suffering as leverage, calling the Truth Movement 'apologists'"


Perhaps Mark Roberts realizes people are onto his game of pseudoskepticism, masked as legit skepticism. After all, merely an hour after he posted his departure thread, a new blog entry here was detailing how he's an apologist for EPA lies. I made a comment on that thread, saying: "Mark Roberts must be getting paid good money to shill for the OCT. He has something like 12-13 thousand posts on JREF (since mid 2006), he spends time trolling many other sites, from Loose Change to YouTube, and he spends every Saturday at Ground Zero counterprotesting the movement. In other words, just about all of his "free time" (if he even really is a NYC tour guide at all) seems to be aimed at attempting to counter the movement and trying to neutralize its arguments."

Roberts made 13,365 posts in just under two years. In one of those posts, he said "No one said the air at Ground Zero was safe to breathe." That post, on 5th November 2007, can be found here:

Roberts' statement about air at Ground Zero can be seen as much of a deliberate lie as when Rumsfeld said "No one ever said that Iraq was immediate threat."

I think people are waking up to the difference between genuine skepticism and pseudoskepticism with a political agenda.



Justin A. Martell

In a soldier's stance, I aimed my hand at the mongrel dogs who teach! Fearing not that I'd become my enemy in the instant that I preach! My pathway led by confusion boats...mutiny from stern to bow!

Roberts as not even a pseudo-skeptic

Referring to Roberts as a pseudo-skeptic is giving him too much credit, imo. He is a skepter through and through. He is about as insignificant as they come. We shouldn't even acknowledge his presence. That's giving him more credit than he deserves. Like a child having a tantrum, he should be ignored. (just like all of the other skepters, who are, at most, a small percentage in numbers compared to the 9/11 Truth and Justice Movement, in the "active" sense, so they really are insignificant in many ways)

The person who sees absolutes and exhibits certitude, where a thoughtful person sees nuanced shades of meaning
and exhibits open-minded objectivity, should be questioned as to agenda and state of mind.

Mark Roberts plays endless devil's advocate against truthers

No matter what a truther says, Roberts just takes the opposite side of the argument. I agree that this very annoying shill should just be ignored.

Consider mass emailing truth messages. More info here:


The JREF circle jerk has lost it's founder and key link.

Will they close ranks and continue?

Find out in my new book "Debunking Debunking Debunking"

A follow up to my best seller "Tabrunka Tabrunka Taburnka"