You forgot Charles Pegelow. He's a fully fledged engineer. Did you deliberately leave him out?
Question for the twoofers about why NIST is wrong
- Thread starter Quad4_72
- Start date
You forgot Charles Pegelow. He's a fully fledged engineer. Did you deliberately leave him out?
She is the source, her page at Clemson, her own web site, etc, etc, etc,
Dental, she had her work on line. She was an ME, she said.
She is nuts, go look at her work!
http://janedoe0911.tripod.com/BilliardBalls.html
She is nuts.
Gravy
Downsitting Citizen
- Joined
- Mar 27, 2006
- Messages
- 17,078
Do you think the energy beam hypothesis has merit?
No doubt she knew this once. I've heard that she was in a coma for six years – her students have written that – although I don't know anyone who can verify that. There's also the possiblilty that she is lying. Steven Jones seems to be saner than her, but he has no problem lying.
Her CV and research projects. Edit: thanks Beachnut.
It's amusing to see the one or two engineers who side with the nutters being paraded about, as if they represent the engineering community. It's somewhat akin the several jewish participants being showcased at the current Iranian Holocaust denier conference.
I work with structural engineers who build skyscrapers and they have more respect for people who believe that the earth is flat then they due WTC controlled demolition nutters.
I don't personally believe the energy beam thing no but could you answer my question. Why is jenga any less ridiculous than trees?
Her motive for lying? Just so she could lose her job and be ridiculed?
Gravy
Downsitting Citizen
- Joined
- Mar 27, 2006
- Messages
- 17,078
No, Wizard, I "deliberately" listened to and took notes on his interview with Fetzer, which was entirely about the collapse of the towers, during which he did not once discuss NIST's conclusions about the collapse of the towers.
What do you think of that, Wizard?
Should Mr. Pegelow choose to research the issue and publish his findings, he will find eager readers.
edit: I see that Wizard's comment wasn't addressed to me. My reply and question to him stands, though.
Last edited:
Gravy
Downsitting Citizen
- Joined
- Mar 27, 2006
- Messages
- 17,078
I don't know what Jenga is. Glad you don't give credence to the energy beam idiocy, though!
It worked for Jones.
defaultdotxbe
Drunken Shikigami
- Joined
- Jul 30, 2006
- Messages
- 7,474
its a cocktail table game where you have a tower made of wooden blocks and you take turns removing a block until it collapses
defaultdotxbe
Drunken Shikigami
- Joined
- Jul 30, 2006
- Messages
- 7,474
fame, recognition, compulsive disorder, who knows
did anyone ever know the name "judy wood" before 9/11?
look at her stuff and do some simple research
Political bias, so she lies to discredit others
Fame? Shes lost her job and her name is now a joke.
defaultdotxbe
Drunken Shikigami
- Joined
- Jul 30, 2006
- Messages
- 7,474
I'm not surprised, she at least has the advantage of being a hot looking gyal.
I have heard the song about her, it's good
Gravy
Downsitting Citizen
- Joined
- Mar 27, 2006
- Messages
- 17,078
I saw it mentioned but it didn't seem relevant to the NIST report. Now that I know it's about the game, I see the relevance but don't think it's an apt analogy. However I think it's far more relevant than Judy Wood's petrified forest or Star Wars hypotheses.
As I state in my WTC 7 paper, these people seem to be lying for political reasons. If that's true then they have become what they say they are fighting against.
who are you looking at? she looks like she was in a coma.
Damn right it's not an apt analogy.
There are many political persuasions amongst these people. What proof do you have it is political?
you could read her web site! Like those who have, and clearly see her bias.
If you would like to read her web site you could decide.
I bet pdoh just is trying to get gravy
pdoh read the web site
Gravy
Downsitting Citizen
- Joined
- Mar 27, 2006
- Messages
- 17,078
I can't speak about Wood in detail, as I haven't seen a presentation of hers, beyond the one slide I reprinted above. But I once timed a Steven Jones presentation, and over half of it was political material, not science (and I'm using a very loose definition of science). Jones starts presentations with a picture of an American flag and a lecture about the Constitution. He then proceeds to misquote Patrick Henry, which is pretty funny. It angers me to see someone so horribly misrepresent science because of a political agenda. I feel the same way about the Bush administration.