His message comes across as elitish. Following the scientific method is fine, but you sure like to be flexible when it is convenient, don't you? Because sometimes you don't follow the scientific method - you think outside of the box. But only when it serves your purpose. Like some will say, life is not just black and white, there is a quantity of grey. Grey that scientific elites won't touch. Tell me, how many peer-reviewed studies or articles are there about things that have been revealed in the media, like MKUltra, CointelPro, Pentagon Papers, Family Jewels, etc. How many about the intelligence failure that supposedly lead to 9/11? How many about the policy failure of two administrations? About the loss of civil liberties through legislation since at least Kennedy but markedly since W Bush and continued by Obama? Anything?
I do but don't understand why no matter who stands up and says "9/11 isn't the way it looks or has been told" that people such as yourself, likely immersed in quite extensive 9/11 documentology, just summarily dismiss them as if it meant nothing. The amount of high-ranking military officials is astounding. But to people like you and your colleagues, retired four-star generals and on down, their views and commentary are worthless because some academic hasn't written an article yet telling you that you should listen to them. But I guess then you'd call the academic a stupid truther too.
How is policy scientific? I was specifically addressing the science of the attacks, the collapses etc.
http://patriotsquestion911.com/ While you are counting, you can read why they feel the way they feel. Let the acceptance come over you at once...
I was leveling a criticism which you were in question of to begin with. The point remains: history is a science so where is the representation of what's really happened, been going on, and about to happen? "Too much grey" methinks. The same likely applies in the sciences. Besides, there's not, or wasn't, a whole lot of room for science after the buildings fell. There's not a whole lot of data available, is there?
The very first testimonial says he looked at pictures to make his determination. In your mind does this override the eyewitnesses and experts on the scene? I got 223. Not even 1/100th of 1% of "Senior Military, Intelligence, Law Enforcement and Government Officials."
There's lots of data available. Literal tons of evidence. I note you don't protest the 'death beams from space' crowd with this much vigor.
Your largely missing my point Jango. My focus on the scientific method pertains largely to the collapse of the WTC buildings. Engineering is a scientific discipline. The proper method to move ideas forward or engage in debate in the world of engineering is through refereed academic discourse. There have been dozens of scientific papers containing methods, data/results and conclusions published in the US and abroad on the WTC towers failures that have undergone the rigors of the scientific method all the while adhering to the high standards of high impact journals. I have not found one paper that even implicitly supports the controlled demolition hypothesis. Go onto google scholar and do a search for yourself and see what you find. Essentially, the way questions and debates are handled within engineering is through the application of the scientific method to produce scientific discourse. I'm not summarily dismissing anything but to think that I'm going to think that the alleged signature of someone who claims to be an engineer on a website's petition holds the same sway as the conclusions drawn from a peer reviewed paper that contains empirical data processed, analyzed and disclosed in a flasifiable manner is rediculous. If all those architects and engineers are so sure of their positions they must have a very VERY compelling dataset that for some reason can not get published in any one of dozens and dozens of journals. If you don't think that there are tens of thousands of engineers out there who would jump at the chance to prove 9/11 was perpetrated by the Bush Admin you are crazy. Academia tends to be very liberal. The analysis of the buidings collapse is largely where the scientific method is so compelling in the 9/11 story. As for other components of 9/11 I am open to any source that i feel I can reasonably expect to be credible. I don't believe the 'official' 9/11 story for a second but I also don't believe that the US gov't perpetrated the attacks. I respect your posts Jango and I think we actually have similar views on a lot of things. What I can't stand is people who come on this forum and claim that the collapse of the towers violates the laws of physics without anything to back it up or even a reasonable understanding of how the scientific method works. I can assure you though, I have as open a mind as anyone here when it comes to 9/11.
Have you found one paper that specifies the total amount of concrete in the towers? The NIST failed to do that in 10,000 pages. Have you found a paper that discusses the "center of mass" of the tilted top portion of the south tower? When in history has so much man made mass been 1,000 feet above the ground and physicists can't even discuss the center of mass? http://www.sciforums.com/showthread...n-inside-job&p=2997239&viewfull=1#post2997239 The physics profession does have a problem however. After 11 years how could they say airliners could not do it and that it is easy to understand why? They would have to explain why they didn't tell us 10 years ago. So why can't they build a physical model that can be completely collapsed by its top 15%. The majority don't even discuss the subject actually but the small percentage who do can't do anything but come up with endless pseudo-intellectual blather. The nation that put men on the Moon can't tell the world the tons of steel and tons of concrete that were on every level of skyscrapers designed before the Moon landing. And yet there are 200 buildings around the world over 800 feet tall. It is not like this is cutting edge technology. It's 300 year old Newtonian crap. psik
Have you found a paper that argues that finding the center of mass above the impact is significant? Why would physicists and engineers build a physical model when they can build a computer model? The engineers have already said airliners didn't do it. They have said airliner and fire did it.
see buildings just dont fall into their own footprint unless manipulated into do so. it seems to me the point he is trying to make is that once its past its cg it tips, it should have tipped, but it didnt. its also the first and last 3 buildings to fall straight into themselves in history without demolition. lots of exploding transformers though. and neither do they eject people at 60 mph, that was probly due to a fire extinguisher blowing up from the massive fires and extreme heat
What was his job? He was credible under government contract, he is credible now. What he says makes sense and is collaborated by other credible individuals. And numbers don't mean anything. You know it. As if there is some magical number that would persuade you. I mean, let's stop here. It really doesn't matter how many military, government, or science people stand up and bring attention to 9/11, all you're going to do is call them stupid truthers, and hand-wave 'em away. As I said, numbers don't matter. The percentage of whistleblowers is small, and the amount that come forward in total is small. There's a lot of reasons for this: fear, not that many people know, don't give a (*)(*)(*)(*), "just doing my job, man", don't want to lose their job, etc. I mean, ask yourself: "Why didn't anyone sound the alarm with MKUltra, CointelPro, Iran-Contra, etc?" Things eventually get found out about, but it's rare for an op to get blown by a whistleblower. The people involved nevertheless knew their actions were wrong yet they commenced on doing whatever it is they're tasked with. People go with the program for all sorts of reasons, similar to the reasons of a small percentage of whistleblowers.
Ah, the good old truthtard bull(*)(*)(*)(*) of pretending anyone associated in any way with the government is suddenly not credible while at the same time they swallow anything from conspiratard sites that have been proven to lie to them time and time again. The incredible dishonesty of the truthers is just mind boggling. We all know there is nothing that will convince you. You can't even pretend you know what you believe in. First you say it was Al Qaeda and the government just let it happen. Then it was the Jews. Then it was the government. Then you were back to the government let it happen. Now you're back to the government did it. You have no credibility because you not only can't provide evidence to back up what you believe, but you can't even tell us what you really DO believe. Why? Because you're not looking for the truth. You know what the truth is and choose to ignore in to pursue your anti government crusade. Nothing matters to truthers other than the conspiracy, especially when it comes to the truth. One stupid (*)(*)(*)(*)er who claims something outrageous is, to them, more credible than all the true experts in the world. When confronted with the overwhelming numbers, they claim numbers don't matter as if numbers don't matter. What they should really be saying is the truth doesn't matter to them. Makes me sick how they (*)(*)(*)(*) on the truth like that.
First of all, where have I ever said that all working government officials are bad? Second of all, why are you writing? Lest alone to me, and I see for Hannibal again. Third, you believe in your heart that the dimensions and overall characteristics that we know about still point to a plane crashing at the Pentagon? What does the visual evidence tell us? What does the video evidence tell us? What does the evidence recovered tell us? And to top this paragraph off: you weren't responding to what I had written. Got some insults in though. " We all know there is nothing that will convince you. You can't even pretend you know what you believe in. First you say it was Al Qaeda and the government just let it happen. Then it was the Jews. Then it was the government. Then you were back to the government let it happen. Now you're back to the government did it. You have no credibility because you not only can't provide evidence to back up what you believe, but you can't even tell us what you really DO believe. Why? Because you're not looking for the truth. You know what the truth is and choose to ignore in to pursue your anti government crusade." Character assassination attempt. Convince me? Convince me of what? Tell me specifically what it is that I am supposed to be convinced of. Don't spare me any details. I want to know everything.
Show me where I've said the Jews did 9/11. Show me where I've flipped flopped that many times. Show me. " Nothing matters to truthers other than the conspiracy, especially when it comes to the truth. One stupid (*)(*)(*)(*)er who claims something outrageous is, to them, more credible than all the true experts in the world. When confronted with the overwhelming numbers, they claim numbers don't matter as if numbers don't matter. What they should really be saying is the truth doesn't matter to them. Makes me sick how they (*)(*)(*)(*) on the truth like that." Again, you're not even addressing the things I wrote, but are quoting me strangely. Needed to get your anti truther message in. Makes you sick that I don't take the governments word for 9/11. That I don't still believe in all of the fairy tale patriotic propaganda I was fed for twelve years. On both accounts, there is simply too much conflicting information for there not to be something wrong. I get that we have to be Machiavellian but there is still a clear indicator of what's right and what's wrong. The line of morality has been habitually crossed by certain segments of our government. I want our Constitutional Rights to be upheld, not trampled on at the slightest whim of the executive. I want the truth to be upheld, and our government held accountable for their actions the same as you and I. 9/11 happens to be an event that has been extensively covered, reports written... the whole nine yards. Our media has covered the scandals that arose. A lot of these scandals changed the dynamic of the way 9/11 could be truthfully told or talked about. And if you recall, both the President and Vice President made remarks against asking questions, I.e conspiracy thinking. The anthrax scare coupled with national patriotic fervor quelled almost all early 'open question asking' sessions. It's now eleven years past 9/11, and that patriotism that had griped our country is gone. There are secession movements in all fifty states. We live in a post-9/11 world, but we're also living under A Clean Break. Our contribution to the effort (thus far) has cost thousands of lives, tens of thousands injured, and trillions of dollars. This we know. It is whether or not our politicians inaction was deliberate to see these plans through. That is the issue here.
and getting smaller. they all seem to end up the same way. Like Danny Jowenko 30 year demotion expert, barry jennings, oniel and a host of others always manage to die within a few years or during these kinds of events. DEAD and to what end? for a world of *******s who could care less and in fact support this kind of tyranny because misguided as they are they actually believe it benefits them. sad sick world we live in.
Jango, I really respect and appreciate your posts and point of view. Although we disagree on some things there are a lot of thing I agree with you about. I think your post that I have quoted above reflects the commonly held perception that the 9/11 issue is either black or white- you either accept the official gov't account without question or you think that every single aspect of 9/11 was a premeditated conspiracy orchestrated by the gov't. In actuality, the opinions many participants here concerning what actually took place on 9/11 fall some where in between the two extreme views and in my mind there is no doubt that the realities of 9/11 are far more likely to be grey than either black or white. http://patriotsquestion911.com/ Patriotsquestion911.com totally encapsulate the diaspora of opinions regarding the 9/11 attacks. The actual opinions espoused by those represented on the patriots 9/11 site represent a range of positions- some believe the gov't perpetrated the attacks while others included on the site have essentially stated that the gov't investigation was incomplete and there are many unanswered questions regarding 9/11. Take Wesley Clarke for example, Gen. Clarke has made numerous public statements on 9/11. Gen. Clarke has never implicated the Gov't as a perpetrator of 9/11. The essence of what Gen. Clarke is saying is that the gov'ts investigation of 9/11 is woefully incomplete, many questions surrounding the attacks remained unanswered and that the 9/11 attacks and events surrounding them may have been manipulated and mischaracterized by the executive branch in a way that allowed them to pursue extreme foreign and domestic policies. In general, I wholeheartedly agree with Gen Clarke as I find his analysis of 9/11 a very rational interpretaion of the 'facts'. I want the same things as you do Jango. I want a country that is governed by the rule of law and I want our gov't to be held accountable to the rule of law. For either of these two things to happen we need transparency at all levels of gov't. If we are to trust our gov't we must be able to trust that our gov't is honest, forthright and a genuine reflection of American ideals and values. When the gov't acts in a manner that is not honest, forthright or in a manner incongruent with the principle upon which our nation was founded it is our duty as this nations citizenry to force accountability upon it. At a minimum, the gov't has been dishonest with regards to events of 9/11. Whats more, there is a substantial amount of evidence to suggest that the gov't manipulated 9/11 to acheive spurious policy goals. Just as I have vociferously argued against the notion that the gov't was directly involved in 9/11 attacks I will likewise argue that the gov't has been misrepresenting the realities of 9/11 to mask the true intent of their implementation of unrelated extreme policies and legislation that have little if anything to do with 9/11. Like most anyone who posts in this section with some regularity I'm quite passionate about this topic. I'm more than willing to admit that no one here, myself included, can say with certainty that their position is the unequivocal truth. The best we can do is explain why we believe our own opinions on the topic best reflect the public record. Anybody who claims otherwise is being illogical and intellectually dishonest.
Dylan Avery, Richard Gage, Judy Wood, Jim Fetzer, Stephen Jones, Alex Jones, et al NOT DEAD and to what end? For a world of waaargarble and the support of crackpot nutcases.
First tell them that bad things can happen (privately of course) Rule number 1 - if not in public eye use plan A Rule number 2 - if in public eye use plan B Rule number 3 - if cant do 1 and 2 is complete failure kill family member(s) Rule number 4 - if none of the above work pay experts to discredit back to plan B plan A - kill em plan B - discredit them .
Its been over 11 years now. Truthers still aren't able to agree on who was behind 9/11, what they did on 9/11, how they did it, where they did it, or why they did it. Hell, the same truther will bounce from theory to theory without any concern for the fact that theory B is in direct conflict with theory A that the day before they were swearing was true. You don't need to discredit a seriously dysfunctional group like that. Just point and laugh and make sure everyone else is in on the joke.
I've pointed out where Huston has done that about 10-15 times. He ignores it though and complains about being called an anti-semite.
