Look Here For a Commentary on the Latest News from AE911Truth

[Criteria]

"I think I see your problem. "Candidate chips" are NOT simply those that meet the basic criteria to be considered for further analysis or selection..".

FTFY

I see your problem.

You cannot provide a link to support yout claim.

Candidate chips are selected chips which ignite at ~430C and among other things, produce iron-rich microspheroids in the resulting residue.

All candidate chips are red and attracted to a magnet.

All chips that are red and attracted to a magnet are not candidate chips.

 

[Georgio]

There's no such thing as a "candidate" chip.

Absolutely. Instead of discussing whether the paper is good/bad conclusive/inconclusive or instead of discussing the paper at all, the Harrit team should separate chips themselves and make them available for study by others. It would completely cut through the debate about the paper and 'recorded vs implemented selection criteria'. If they are not keen to do this, then that reflects very poorly on their motives.

Actually, has anyone here asked any of the Bentham team directly for a sample of what they have determined to be thermitic chips? Not for a sample of dust but for chips that have been selected by the Bentham team. If so, what was the response?

 

[GlennB]

Candidate chips are selected chips which ignite at ~430C and among other things, produce iron-rich microspheroids in the resulting residue.

No, those would be thermitic chips (we're supposed to believe). Otherwise why use the word 'candidate'? A candidate doesn't necessarily get the job/meet the specification. They're just candidates that have to prove themselves/get elected subsequently. You seem not to understand the meaning of the word, or to have adopted a special meaning.

All chips that are red and attracted to a magnet are not candidate chips.

See above. Yet Harrit used your denied definition to select thermitic chips at at least one presentation.

 

[DGM]

Absolutely. Instead of discussing whether the paper is good/bad conclusive/inconclusive or instead of discussing the paper at all, the Harrit team should separate chips themselves and make them available for study by others. It would completely cut through the debate about the paper and 'recorded vs implemented selection criteria'. If they are not keen to do this, then that reflects very poorly on their motives.

Actually, has anyone here asked any of the Bentham team directly for a sample of what they have determined to be thermitic chips? Not for a sample of dust but for chips that have been selected by the Bentham team. If so, what was the response?

There is no need for them to seperate them out themselves. A definitive separation criterion is what is usually defined in a proper paper. It's first and foremost in making the findings falsifiable.

Harrit et al did not do this. I don't think it wasn't intentional on their part.

 

[beachnut]

Absolutely. Instead of discussing whether the paper is good/bad conclusive/inconclusive or instead of discussing the paper at all, the Harrit team should separate chips themselves and make them available for study by others. It would completely cut through the debate about the paper and 'recorded vs implemented selection criteria'. If they are not keen to do this, then that reflects very poorly on their motives.

Actually, has anyone here asked any of the Bentham team directly for a sample of what they have determined to be thermitic chips? Not for a sample of dust but for chips that have been selected by the Bentham team. If so, what was the response?

There are no thermitic chips in WTC dust... Jones and Harrit lied.

There was no steel damaged by thermite; and Harrit and Jones can be ignored, they are nuts in a failed movement. The movement is based on the ignorance of the followers, the truth believers in thermite, CD, and the inside job.

The dust was studied by USGS, and other valid dust studies. Jones made up the nonsense of thermite being used to destroy the WTC four years after 911 based on nonsense.

When it is realized there is no evidence for thermite being used, trying to find thermite in the dust is nonsense.

Why did Jones lie? Wait, this is a thread about Gage's spreading lies. Every-time I see Gage, I expect some comet is coming to take him to CD inside job nirvana. ThermitesGate, like HeavensGate.

Still on the fence for the lie of themite? Gage makes $500,000 a year selling lies.

Why did the USGS not find thermite? Why did RJ Lee not find thermite? Questions Jones will not answer; guess he might say USGS and RJ Lee are part of the inside job.

 

[tsig]

Your reply is as clear as mud.

Well, there's mud in your eye.

 

[tsig]

Couldn't care less. Here for LOLZ remember.

14 years of truther failure, thanks for the free comedy! Keep it coming!!!!!

It's like watching the Coyote and Roadrunner cartoons.

 

[tsig]

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.

One must become one with the Truth^TM before one can accept it. It cannot be comprehended outside the human experience. Time wounds all heels.


Amerka, how cute.

 

[Georgio]

Still on the fence for the lie of themite?

Not really, but a very little bit - but that's because I never commit to a position if I don't understand either or both sides of the argument properly, which is the case with the dust analysis debate. Everything I've read on here that I have understood has convinced me that the chips are primer paints.

 

[beachnut]

Not really, but a very little bit - but that's because I never commit to a position if I don't understand either or both sides of the argument properly, which is the case with the dust analysis debate. Everything I've read on here that I have understood has convinced me that the chips are primer paints.

911 truth has no side, no evidence, no clue.

There are not both sides. Jones lied about thermite, he made it up.

911 truth has fantasy - that is not a side, it is BS. There is no argument, 911 truth has fantasy, a fact, and 911 was an event done by 19 terrorist with planes. Thus the WTC collapse was due to fire.

There are only two sides in the one the fence fantasy version of 911.

 

[Crazy Chainsaw]

Not really, but a very little bit - but that's because I never commit to a position if I don't understand either or both sides of the argument properly, which is the case with the dust analysis debate. Everything I've read on here that I have understood has convinced me that the chips are primer paints.

What's left to understand Steven E. Jones lied from the very start, he discovered,
All the evidence of thermite that turned out to be BS.
There is nothing else left of his credibility, he is a man of lies not of science!

 

[jaydeehess]

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

Well, that and the Ottoman Empire, there redrawing of borders after WW2, the Cold War, etc. But yeah, 9/11 does enter into it.

 

[Criteria]

What's left to understand Steven E. Jones lied from the very start, he discovered,
All the evidence of thermite that turned out to be BS.
There is nothing else left of his credibility, he is a man of lies not of science!

Unmotivated lying for an unpopular cause makes far less sense than your lying about a person's reasons for supporting an unpopular cause.

 

[Crazy Chainsaw]

Unmotivated lying for an unpopular cause makes far less sense than your lying about a person's reasons for supporting an unpopular cause.

Why would I have to lie about the truth, Jones has been caught misrepresenting facts from
the start of the truth movement.

Remember the angle cut beams cut with thermitic lances, Jones's student sent me an email
Back in 2005 with a link to a site on cutting torches, and the information was true the torches
Could not cut 4 inch thick steel, but on the same link there were oxygen lances, burning bars,
that could.

So why didn't Jones know his statement was a lie?

Why didn't he research it correctly instead of using false second hand references, is he that incompetent?

He didn't even know that thermitic lances, oxygen lances with Aluminum wires
Inside were donated to the recovery effort, by the company in New York that manufactured
Them.

Why so incompetent, down right fraudulent behavior from him in all things related to 9/11/2001?

 

[ProBonoShill]

Whilst I agree that I am a hypocrite, I wasn't lying when I said I would want them to back up the accusation. I've already said this - 'I would want' does not mean 'I would pressure'.

Part of the reason is that whenever a claim is made on here by a 9/11 Truth supporter it is guaranteed to be properly challenged. Can it really be said that spooky24's unambiguous statement of fact has been properly challenged for evidence? Precisely 3 people (NOT including yourself until you had danced around it with beachnut for a while) seemed to care whether the accusation of anti-semitism was true or not, and beachnut has even actively and repeatedly stated that he thinks it doesn't matter - a view that has only been questioned by me despite having sat there for weeks.

Sorry I'm not understanding this.

What do you consider "pressure"? Is asking for evidence "pressure".

A truther claims a New York policeman aided in the murder of his fellow citizens; or maybe a firefighter was in on it too, an airline employee, a government worker and you think asking him for proof of this claim is "pressuring them"?

The fact you are more concerned with a truther being labelled anti-semitic than innocent people being accused of mass murder speaks volumes about you and truthers in general.

When you made that statement was it meant to "pressure" spooky24 into backing up his claim?

 

[Criteria]

Why would I have to lie about the truth, Jones has been caught misrepresenting facts from
the start of the truth movement.

Remember the angle cut beams cut with thermitic lances, Jones's student sent me an email
Back in 2005 with a link to a site on cutting torches, and the information was true the torches
Could not cut 4 inch thick steel, but on the same link there were oxygen lances, burning bars,
that could.

So why didn't Jones know his statement was a lie?

Why didn't he research it correctly instead of using false second hand references, is he that incompetent?

He didn't even know that thermitic lances, oxygen lances with Aluminum wires
Inside were donated to the recovery effort, by the company in New York that manufactured
Them.

Why so incompetent, down right fraudulent behavior from him in all things related to 9/11/2001?

So. 10 years ago, someone, NOT Dr. Jones, supposedly sent you (??) a link to a page about cutting torches.

Somehow this long ago memory turns Dr. Jones into a liar.

...snip...

Edited by jsfisher: 

Edited for compliance with Rule 12 of the Membership Agreement.

 

[Oystein]

Unmotivated lying for an unpopular cause makes far less sense than your lying about a person's reasons for supporting an unpopular cause.

I think 9/11 Truth actually is nothing but a popular cause! It is not popular with the vast majority of virtually all social strata, to be sure, but it is highly popular in a particular subculture on the fringes of society. That subculture, though tiny, is still larger than the subculture of nuclear physicists, and it is sooooooo much easier to enthrall the Truther community - lies will be much more easily accepted by that lunatic fringe than by a scientific community.

So yes, I think very much that the likes of Jones and Gage bath very much in the warm feeling of popular support (in Gage's case also, and not least of all, financial support) from vocal woosters.

 

[Crazy Chainsaw]

So. 10 years ago, someone, NOT Dr. Jones, supposedly sent you (??) a link to a page about cutting torches.

Somehow this long ago memory turns Dr. Jones into a liar.

...snip...

Edited by jsfisher: 

Moderated content redacted.

Dr. Jones had the student send me the link personally, after our phone conversation in 2005!
He mentioned he would send it and asked for my email address, to send it.
The link to oxygen lances was at top of the page on the torch data, are you saying Dr. Jones couldn't
Have read or was too lazy to read English?

(Oxygen Burning Bars for thicker steel.)
Was at the top of the page of the torch data, all one had to do is click the link!

 

[Criteria]

Edited by jsfisher: 

Moderated content redacted.

Dr. Jones had the student send me the link personally, after our phone conversation in 2005!
He mentioned he would send it and asked for my email address, to send it.
The link to oxygen lances was at top of the page on the torch data, are you saying Dr. Jones couldn't
Have read or was too lazy to read English?

What I am saying is that without documented proof and an established record for honesty, the source of such an accusation lacks sufficient credibility to be believed.

 

[Crazy Chainsaw]

What I am saying is that without documented proof and an established record for honesty, the source of such an accusation lacks sufficient credibility to be believed.

Fair enough, however I must point out he did state that the angle cut columns could not be cut, with a torch, back in 2005 in coincidence with his paper he promoted on MSNBC, shortly
Before my appearence on NBC, in 2005, and since it was a truther at NBC, who gave me his number, and since many people here know of the phone conversation and other email exchanges I have had with him in the past, my comment still stands.
I will give him the benefit of the doubt though and chalk it up to his exstream incompetence,
and not actual deciet!