Look Here For a Commentary on the Latest News from AE911Truth

[Criteria]

You do realize most of us are still here for the free entertainment and LOLZ don't you.

The truth movement died years ago and has been soundly thrashed over and over again, you being the latest example. Thanks for your contributions!

You are entitled to your hollow opinion, for that is all you've got to offer.

The last time I checked, an anonymous opinion such as yours and a couple of dollars was worth a cup of coffee.

The truth never dies.

 

[beachnut]

You are entitled to your hollow opinion, for that is all you've got to offer.

The last time I checked, an anonymous opinion such as yours and a couple of dollars was worth a cup of coffee.

The truth never dies.

For 911 truth, the truth was stillborn. Anonymous, and is that you in your avatar?

The movement of lies based on overwhelming evidence - 911 truth, and AE911Truth. What an ironic name for nonsense.

Rational thought died, 911 truth was born.

Why has AE911Truth failed to provide evidence? Found some damage to the steel on 911 by thermite yet? No, and you will never discuss your failure to produce evidence of damage to steel. Never.

 

[GlennB]

The truth never dies.

You should try establishing some then. For a start, answer the questions you ran away from over in the 'thermitic dust' thread.

 

[Oystein]

Yeah no.

His post again with emphasis added.



Georgio is giant hypocrite and it's blatantly obvious.

In case William Pepper should come to this forum and accuse someone of mass murder, I shall make sure I monitor if Georgio asks Pepper to provide evidence to support the accusation. If no one else does.

But you are insisting that the debunker community here gets through with the obvious Move of Goalposts.

For the time being, there is the claim of fact that William Pepper, in one or several presentations available on YouTube or similar, lays the blame for various Conspiracy Theories on "the Jews".

It is common, generally accepted and indeed considered here at ISF to be the good and right skeptic attitude to ask for evidence back up claims of fact. I don't understand why this is all of sudden made out to be hypocritical.

As a matter of fact, I have not seen or heard Pepper make such anti-semitic remarks, and as I am somewhat interested in learning about anti-semitism with the TM, I would like to see that evidence, too.

Please tell me: Am I a hypocrite, too? Or why exactly is it wrong for Georgio to ask for evidence? Or why, pray tell, do you think the burden of proof is not on spooky24 for his claim of fact?

Why the double standard?

 

[Oystein]

...
As for your assertion of one group vs the other, I think therein lies your problem, this is a skeptic forum where rational thinking wins the day. Groups don't matter, sides don't matter and me vs you doesn't matter.

Cold hard rational thinking, science and facts do.

I think this is wishful thinking.
If this were true, there wouldn't be this extremely hard push to Move a particular Goalpost, and there wouldn't be all those heated, vitriolic posts against one member who dares to question certain claims made by the debunker side.

The moment spooky24 had posted the claim that Pepper said (I paraphrase) "it's always da Joos" and Georgio asked for a linky link, every cold hard rational thinking, science and facts loving skeptic ought to have chimed in: "Yeah, spooky, where's your evidence?" and since no evidence ever came forward, the claim should have been (tentatively) rejected without evidence.

The opposite happened - scorn was heaped on the skeptic, not on the person who made a claim that wasn't backed up by evidence.

I think your perception of how this forum ticks is demonstrably wrong.

 

[Georgio]

Thanks for the support on this issue, Oystein. It's also important to remember that 'please provide evidence' is not another way of saying 'I think you're lying'.

 

[Gamolon]

The truth never dies.

Right.

Makes you wonder why the truth movement is dying...

 

[Criteria]

You should try establishing some then. For a start, answer the questions you ran away from over in the 'thermitic dust' thread.

GlennB, I am not running away from questions.

I am simply ignoring your demands for speculation.

Edited by Agatha: 

Edited to remove breach of rule 12

 

[Crazy Chainsaw]

GlennB, I am not running away from questions.

I am simply ignoring your demands for speculation.

Edited by Agatha: 

Edited to remove moderated content from within quote

OK then here is a quick one seeing that oxidation events with carbon likely produced temperatures from 1200C to 1400C how did a self oxidizing compound survive those
Temperatures if it ignites at 430C, to be found in sufficient quantity in the dust to prove sufficiently that it was not an artifact of natural production?

 

[tsig]

On this point, I think we share some measure of agreement Georgio.

It is truly sad that 9/11 Truth attackers feel constantly compelled to scorn 9/11 Truth supporters. My feeling is that people who are honestly comfortable in their beliefs do not need to be so over zealous in defending them.

On the other hand, people who are insecure in their convictions behave in the rabid, childish, mocking manner, all too often exhibited by 9/11 Truth attackers in this forum and elsewhere.
Fight the good fight Georgio, be your own man, and whether you agree or disagree with the advocates of 9/11 Trurh, don't let the zealots here bully you into submission.

How black is your kettle?

 

[Criteria]

OK then here is a quick one seeing that oxidation events with carbon likely produced temperatures from 1200C to 1400C how did a self oxidizing compound survive those
Temperatures if it ignites at 430C, to be found in sufficient quantity in the dust to prove sufficiently that it was not an artifact of natural production?

Other than the WTC on 9/11, what recorded proof can you cite that shows iron-rich microspheres have ever been found permeating the debris of steel-structured buildings subjected to fire?

 

[Criteria]

Right.

Makes you wonder why the truth movement is dying...

The truth is what is being sought.

The truth is separate from those who seek it.

As time goes on and wounds heal, I see the interest in the truth about 9/11 growing rather than dying.

People trying to understand the mess in the Middle East only have to look to how Amerka reacted to 9/11.

 

[Spanx]

Other than the WTC on 9/11, what recorded proof can you cite that shows iron-rich microspheres have ever been found permeating the debris of steel-structured buildings subjected to fire?

What can you tell us/me about iron-rich microspheres ?

How are they created ?

 

[GlennB]

GlennB, I am not running away from questions.

I am simply ignoring your demands for speculation.

Edited by Agatha: 

Edited to remove moderated content from within quote

No speculation required.

Do you agree that the Bentham authors' failure to report on their stock of resistivity measurements of different red/gray chips - given your own claims on the matter - constitutes bad science?

That their claim to have learned how to "eyeball" the thermitic chips wasn't reported, let alone supported by documented evidence such as photos?

That using an atypical chip for the one reported resistivity measurement constituted bad science? Bad science that such experienced scientists should have seen from a mile away?

(just for starters)

 

[Crazy Chainsaw]

Other than the WTC on 9/11, what recorded proof can you cite that shows iron-rich microspheres have ever been found permeating the debris of steel-structured buildings subjected to fire?

Iron rich microspheres have been found in Greenland in Antarctica's ice anywhere humans have been friction causes them in car brakes, as the steel rotor wears,
They are everywhere in the modern world, you have to be more specific about the type of
Microspheres before you can name a possible source, and Jones and Harrit's data
Does not do that.
So all buildings could potentially have them as contamination.
Please specifically state the type of microspheres of iron your referring too do you mean reduced iron, steel, FeO-Fe3O4, FeAl?

I know those were all found by Jones.

An arc welded steel building should be littered with steel microspheres in places, where access is limited.

 

[Crazy Chainsaw]

http://www.google.com/patents/US4365984

How about mineral wool from slag from iron smelting, in which microspheres would be present
In the fire proofing of the steel?

 

[Gamolon]

The truth is what is being sought.

Right.

Here we all sit in this forum discussing the WTC dust and what was contained therein. In this dust was found red/gray, magnetically attracted chips. According to Harrit's paper and those who support it, those chips are thermite/thermitic. The folks on the other side of the coin say those chips are primer paint.

Harrit and others try to say the chips are NOT paint by avoiding doing any tests done on actual paint chips they found in the dust! Are you kidding me?!

1. Why did Harrit choose to compare resistivity results from an EXTERNAL source? Why not just test the paint chips he discovered in the WTD dust?

2. Why did Harrit not just show the spectra of the primer paint chips he found in the dust versus the spectra of the thermitic chips he found?

3. Why did Harrit use OTHER types of paint chips to do DSC testing on instead of the paint chips he found in the WTC dust.

4. Why did Harrit only choose to get the Tnemec paint components? What about the LaClede components?

Utter stupidity! Harrit did everything in his power to NOT compare the paint chips he had.

Why?

Because he was under the impression that ALL the red/gray, magnetically attracted chips he pulled out were thermitic and that's what he set out to prove. The way he performed random tests on random chips proves this.

 

[DGM]

The truth is what is being sought.

Only if you are open to accept it.

The truth is separate from those who seek it.

True. From what is seen, the Harrit group only wants truth on their terms. Questioning their conclusions and methods are not allowed. Also asking for data they claim to have is not allowed. Sharing of samples? No way. Asking for clarification in the chip selection process? No way.

You can't say any of these points are false. Who is hiding from the truth?

 

[Criteria]

From what is seen, the Harrit group only wants truth on their terms. Questioning their conclusions and methods are not allowed. Also asking for data they claim to have is not allowed. Sharing of samples? No way. Asking for clarification in the chip selection process? No way.

You can't say any of these points are false. Who is hiding from the truth?

You only see what you wish to see, and state your prejudiced opinions as if they are facts.

Dr. Harrit et al simply want the truth on its own terms. There are lots of ways to question the work of reputable scientists. Inserting your chronic derogatory opinions in lieu of legitimate scientific questions will never gain you any respect.

 

[DGM]

You only see what you wish to see, and state your prejudiced opinions as if they are facts.

Dr. Harrit et al simply want the truth on its own terms. There are lots of ways to question the work of reputable scientists. Inserting your chronic derogatory opinions in lieu of legitimate scientific questions will never gain you any respect.

I'm not looking for respect in the forensic chemistry field. I'm a general contractor that builds buildings. I'm asking for them to make good on promises they made and address legitimate concerns that effect the validity of their paper. Something they refuse to do.

Do you really think the papers separation criterion is adequate to allow duplication of their results? A "trained eye" is a cop out.

This question requires no speculation.

ETA: As a building professional, their chips wouldn't do jack squat to a steel framed building.