CIT: Who cares?

I've written several posts in the past over the flawed "evidence" that CIT displays. There was a time when I could debate the CIT evidence for days on end before seeing that their cult-like nature blinds them from things like "science", "corroboration", "Occam's Razor", and all the while using double-standards to convince themselves that they are right.

Who cares?

At this point, the futility of trying to argue with a zealot prevents me from staying in these fruitless arguments for much longer than a couple responses. They're a distraction. A pure, non-fulfilling distraction that can't do anything for the truth movement.

You want to know why? Here's how flawed the CIT evidence is: CIT could be RIGHT and they still wouldn't be able to help the movement. That's right, let's say that CIT is right. About EVERYTHING. The physical evidence was faked. The DNA was faked. The south path witnesses are wrong and the selected testimony from the north path witnesses are right. In contradiction to all science, CIT has reached the true conclusion. But it's not valid! The fact that it's not scientific, the fact that CIT expects people to ignore the inaccurate testimony in favor of testimony purported to be accurate means that it would never fly in a court room.

If a witness places a taxi cab incorrectly, then his testimony is flawed. AND HE IS UNRELIABLE. If a witness says he saw an impact, and your theory involves the plane FLYING OVER the building, then he must be WRONG! About SOMETHING! This means that he is UNRELIABLE. You can't just say insist that some parts are right and some parts are wrong. No judge would take that case. Even if 9/11 Truth wasn't a controversial issue, no judge would consider this evidence. The case would be thrown out faster than you can say "logical fallacies".

So even if CIT is right, their conclusions are not supported by valid evidence. It is composed entirely of cherry-picking. Everything that opposes their selected testimony is faked or invalid, yet in no way infringes upon the credibility of their witnesses. It is depressing that there are so many people who look at this evidence and take it seriously.

Hey, I understand. I've been there. I've mentioned before that when I started in the movement, I was on something of a "high". It became very difficult to filter the legitimate from the dubious. But I've always, under all circumstances, maintained an open mind to alternate ideas, and so I was able, eventually, to evaluate the evidence critically, until I realized it was non-scientific bogus that held no place in a movement seeking truth. Which is the problem. Pride has taken priority over truth. An inability to accept that mistakes were made and conclusions were drawn prematurely has led to CIT's continuing promotion and made it difficult, if even possible, to show their followers that they've been duped. Whereas I have made it a priority in my life to refrain from emotional attachment to any beliefs I hold, CIT, as well as other groups within the movement, have put themselves ahead of the truth they claim to seek.

CIT continues to distract and detract, promoting fallacies and flawed evidence that won't get the movement anywhere. Yet somehow they have followers. Well, fine. CIT and their followers have made it abundantly clear that they're not interested in anything that opposes their theory. So all we can really hope to do is prevent well-meaning people from being sucked into the hype. No more pointless debates, no more wasted time, no more trying to make sense with these people. Let's shift our target audience to people who are not yet exposed. People still trying to make sense of everything. Let's appeal to people who can still be drawn towards critical thinking. All that these CIT debates have accomplished is promotion for CIT. CIT has done nothing for us. Why should we do anything for them?