peer review.

[T.A.M.]

Look TAM, I will not defend you and your work here, and will continue not to support you, so long as your position here is based on your lack of appreciation of the REALPOLITIK of scientific publishing.

Did I not just say that I was aware of the politics of scientific publishing. I just do not think they are as bad as you make them out to be.

As for your defending me, that is fine, as I have no "work" here. If I ever do publish anything regarding 9/11 (Extremely unlikely) it would be around the medical issues surrounding the first responders after the event.

As for defending you, I did not do it to be "smarmy", but in the interest of fair play. I can see you have no respect for this, so from now on, do not accuse me of not being fair about issues, if I do not speak up when you are attacked.

TAM

 

[beachnut]

Would you say the same about the initial claims of Galileo, the Wright brothers, etc. take a look at the link here

http://amasci.com/supress1.html

You have a problem with logical thinking equating the liars from the 9/11 truth movement to great thinkers of the ages. The 9/11 truth movement are more like NAZIs, there is only their "truth" and you have their word on it.

9/11 truth is the anti-knowledge force, your analogy is really sad. lol

I would have been with the Wright brothers, my distant uncle was. I would have helped Galileo, but then I want to be an individual, not a group think truther with no real ability to think for myself. What is your goal realcddeal? Ironic name, like 9/11 truth.

Cognitive Processes and the Suppression of Sound Scientific Ideas, the web site you posted. You have found what 9/11 truth is all about. Suppression of Sound Scientific Ideas. 9/11 truth has zero sound scientific ideas. This is great, you think the fact less 9/11 truth movement is like Galileo, but they are like NAZIs, the anti-intellectuals making up lies about 9/11.

 

[Tony Szamboti]

Did I not just say that I was aware of the politics of scientific publishing. I just do not think they are as bad as you make them out to be.

As for your defending me, that is fine, as I have no "work" here. If I ever do publish anything regarding 9/11 (Extremely unlikely) it would be around the medical issues surrounding the first responders after the event.

As for defending you, I did not do it to be "smarmy", but in the interest of fair play. I can see you have no respect for this, so from now on, do not accuse me of not being fair about issues, if I do not speak up when you are attacked.

TAM

I think it is an accurate statement that Dr. Greening is probably the most experienced person in the discussion here when it comes to the peer review process and whether or not there is occassional subjectivity involved. Unfortunately, human nature dictates that such will happen occassionally. However, when something is presented to a large group of people statistics take over and any subjectivity a few people might have is overwhelmed by the majority with an objective view of the matter. I am thankful that Dr. Greening has been honest and candid about this issue.

 

[T.A.M.]

I think it is an accurate statement that Dr. Greening is probably the most experienced person in the discussion here when it comes to the peer review process and whether or not there is occassional subjectivity involved. Unfortunately, human nature dictates that such will happen occassionally. However, when something is presented to a large group of people statistics take over and any subjectivity a few people might have is overwhelmed by the majority with an objective view of the matter. I am thankful that Dr. Greening has been honest and candid about this issue.

I agree, although the lack of expertese within 99.999% of the truther community does not bode well for Objective criticism of any article, for either side...they will be unfairly in favor of a paper that supports them, and unfairly against a paper that does not. Of course, this will likely play the same way with alot of posters here, but we are much, much fewer in number (JREF Debunkers that is).

TAM

 

[beachnut]

"Lots" is an exaggeration in terms of intelligent, I can count them on one hand. I will concede however that "lots" of people disagree with me.

I do try to avoid lumping the JREFers together to use the less intelligent ones as material to carry out Ad Homs against the overall arguments (as per JREFers and the St***ies).

You are still having problems understanding what Ad Homs means.

 

[Zep]

Would you say the same about the initial claims of Galileo, the Wright brothers, etc. take a look at the link here

http://amasci.com/supress1.html

"To wear the mantle of Galileo, it is not enough to be persecuted by an unkind establishment. One must also be right."

 

[Tony Szamboti]

You have a problem with logical thinking equating the liars from the 9/11 truth movement to great thinkers of the ages. The 9/11 truth movement are more like NAZIs, there is only their "truth" and you have their word on it.

9/11 truth is the anti-knowledge force, your analogy is really sad. lol

I would have been with the Wright brothers, my distant uncle was. I would have helped Galileo, but then I want to be an individual, not a group think truther with no real ability to think for myself. What is your goal realcddeal? Ironic name, like 9/11 truth.

Cognitive Processes and the Suppression of Sound Scientific Ideas, the web site you posted. You have found what 9/11 truth is all about. Suppression of Sound Scientific Ideas. 9/11 truth has zero sound scientific ideas. This is great, you think the fact less 9/11 truth movement is like Galileo, but they are like NAZIs, the anti-intellectuals making up lies about 9/11.

Concerning the events of 911 my goal is honest objective evaluation and analysis of the entire mass of evidence. I do not believe we have gotten that yet. I believe a new investigation is called for, which is not controlled by parties which may be suspect, due to the fact that they had something to gain. Any law enforcement official who potentially could have had something to gain from a crime is usually recused, to avoid conflicts of interest, and to maintain propriety. That is standard procedure. If a police chief's wife is murdered he will not be allowed to run the investigation for these reasons. The Bush administration had massive things to gain from the attacks of Sept. 11, 2001 and yet all three of the investigations we have had so far, FEMA, 911 Commission, and NIST were fully controlled by the Bush administration.

As far as I am concerned people are innocent until proven guilty but there are protocols when investigating a crime which were not followed when it comes to the events of Sept. 11, 2001.

Most people would not call it Nazi like to want to question people who had access to the building's interiors in light of the fact that firefighters mentioned seeing, feeling, and hearing explosions both before and during the collapses of the towers. Even so, this simple process was never done and should have been. So why shouldn't it be done now? If it was all just a simple mistake we need to correct it. If you really want to put the conspiracy theories to bed we need to do a complete above board investigation.

 

[Tony Szamboti]

"To wear the mantle of Galileo, it is not enough to be persecuted by an unkind establishment. One must also be right."

Agreed!

 

[Zep]

Agreed!

...and the Troofers clearly aren't, by anyone's standards.

So can we dispose of the great trVth! plinth persecution complex, please.

 

[Brainache]

Concerning the events of 911 my goal is honest objective evaluation and analysis of the entire mass of evidence. I do not believe we have gotten that yet. I believe a new investigation is called for, which is not controlled by parties which may be suspect, due to the fact that they had something to gain. Any law enforcement official who potentially could have had something to gain from a crime is usually recused, to avoid conflicts of interest, and to maintain propriety. That is standard procedure. If a police chief's wife is murdered he will not be allowed to run the investigation for these reasons. The Bush administration had massive things to gain from the attacks of Sept. 11, 2001 and yet all three of the investigations we have had so far, FEMA, 911 Commission, and NIST were fully controlled by the Bush administration.

As far as I am concerned people are innocent until proven guilty but there are protocols when investigating a crime which were not followed when it comes to the events of Sept. 11, 2001.

Most people would not call it Nazi like to want to question people who had access to the building's interiors in light of the fact that firefighters mentioned seeing, feeling, and hearing explosions both before and during the collapses of the towers. Even so, this simple process was never done and should have been. So why shouldn't it be done now? If it was all just a simple mistake we need to correct it. If you really want to put the conspiracy theories to bed we need to do a complete above board investigation.

Are you saying that the initial investigations should have been carried out by someone other than the FBI and the various US law enforcement departments?

Looks like in your police chief's wife analogy you are saying that no police should be involved in the investigation at all.

So who should be doing these investigations? Alex Jones?

 

[Tony Szamboti]

Are you saying that the initial investigations should have been carried out by someone other than the FBI and the various US law enforcement departments?

Looks like in your police chief's wife analogy you are saying that no police should be involved in the investigation at all.

So who should be doing these investigations? Alex Jones?

No, I didn't say no police chief should be involved in the investigation of another chief's wife's murder, just not the one who has a potential conflict of interest.

I do believe the investigation of the Twin Tower collapses should have been conducted by organizations such as the FBI, NIST, and FEMA but that their directors, who were politically appointed by the Bush administration, should have been recused. They weren't. The investigations should have been controlled and run by career government employees who were not politically appointed by this administration.

I don't believe Philip Zelikow, a definite Bush insider, should have been the director of the 911 Commission.

I also believe that in the case of the towers that all video and photos should be made available to the public for scrutiny and affirmation of the conclusions found by these investigations which would have been independent of political manipulation.

 

[Tony Szamboti]

Because all "Truth Movement" papers appear as whitepapers on the Internet, and every one that I've read has had more holes in it than a horse-trader's mule -- excepting those where a faction of the "Truth Movement" tries to discredit other factions. That is why they aren't published. The question of politics never even enters the equation.

The "Space Beams are Nonsense" whitepapers and Gregory Urich's mass calculation paper are examples of those that are not nonsense, but they don't contest the NIST report, and as such are not actually "Truth Movement" papers.


My evidence is the "Journal" for 9/11 Studies. I am not engaging in unfounded speculation. Nice try, though.

I've participated on both sides of the peer review process, even in the same week. Even currently. Individual journals or editors sometimes have unfortunate politics, but there are so many journals out there that if your paper is correct, you can get it published. You claimed otherwise. You pulled that out of thin air.



If you're attempting to claim that journals today behave similarly to those four centuries past, you've no business challenging me.

I am saying human nature is the same today as it was four centuries ago. Only the issues have changed.

I didn't claim anything. How many times do I have to tell you I said "I think that the controversial nature is the reason"

Do you think Greg Urich is right that the actual mass of the towers was significantly lower than the pruported 500,000 tons each?

I wrote one of those "Space Beams are Nonsense" whitepapers which were used to put James Fetzer and Judy Wood to bed on that.

 

[T.A.M.]

No, I didn't say no police chief should be involved in the investigation of another chief's wife's murder, just not the one who has a potential conflict of interest.

I do believe the investigation of the Twin Tower collapses should have been conducted by organizations such as the FBI, NIST, and FEMA but that their directors, who were politically appointed by the Bush administration, should have been recused. They weren't. The investigations should have been controlled and run by career government employees who were not politically appointed by this administration.

I don't believe Philip Zelikow, a definite Bush insider, should have been the director of the 911 Commission.

I also believe that in the case of the towers that all video and photos should be made available to the public for scrutiny and affirmation of the conclusions found by these investigations which would have been independent of political manipulation.

Oh come on now. Clinton and his cronies were in power for 8 years, right up until 9 months before the attack. Don't be just blaming BUSH and the Neocons...it goes much deeper. The NWO is not partisan. When Hillary gets back in power, you know it will only continue....BAHHHAAAHAAAAHAAA!!!

TAM

 

[beachnut]

Concerning the events of 911 my goal is honest objective evaluation and analysis of the entire mass of evidence. I do not believe we have gotten that yet. I believe a new investigation is called for, which is not controlled by parties which may be suspect, due to the fact that they had something to gain. Any law enforcement official who potentially could have had something to gain from a crime is usually recused, to avoid conflicts of interest, and to maintain propriety. That is standard procedure. If a police chief's wife is murdered he will not be allowed to run the investigation for these reasons. The Bush administration had massive things to gain from the attacks of Sept. 11, 2001 and yet all three of the investigations we have had so far, FEMA, 911 Commission, and NIST were fully controlled by the Bush administration.

As far as I am concerned people are innocent until proven guilty but there are protocols when investigating a crime which were not followed when it comes to the events of Sept. 11, 2001.

Most people would not call it Nazi like to want to question people who had access to the building's interiors in light of the fact that firefighters mentioned seeing, feeling, and hearing explosions both before and during the collapses of the towers. Even so, this simple process was never done and should have been. So why shouldn't it be done now? If it was all just a simple mistake we need to correct it. If you really want to put the conspiracy theories to bed we need to do a complete above board investigation.

Based on your present rate of uncovering real evidence, I predict you will solve 9/11 by 2173. (based on the rate you have shown rational evidence of any thing for the past 5 plus years)

No it is NAZI like propaganda coming from the 9/11 truth movement. The 9/11 truth movement is a one way propaganda machine, like NAZIs. The 9/11 truth movement is like a NAZI propaganda machine. I have been a victim of the NAZI like tactics at different truth forums and other places. I have been threatened and called a criminal for my beliefs, you truthers are like NAZIs. .

You have a problem. Open and independent papers and research has been done. Some of it is proprietary and you will be given the results when you build your next 1 billion dollar building. Independent papers are in academic journals, professional journal. The number of independent world wide studies is more than you will ever need to solve 9/11. The CD stuff is proved wrong on 9/11, and you are just not putting the evidence together.

9/11 truth is the closed minded society that calls everyone who knows the truth closed minded. They are the little kid group, that says no you are closed minded. What a bunch of pathetic false information spewing people, 9/11 truth.

I did not form anything from official reports. I knew on 9/11 that the WTC fell due to impact, fire, and failure. I have seen structural steel fail so quick in a fire. I fly airplanes, I love physics, I always liked science. But 9/11 without any help was so easy with my back ground in the USAF, engineering, and other experiences. I knew at the second impact OBL was a player, I knew when the WTC fell, it was impact, fire and failure. I think it is cool when I read a paper that confirms my calculations and observations. I find it real dumb that 9/11 truth makes up the explosive stuff when they know the witnesses are talking about sounds. I have also been around blasts, and I observed no blasts on 9/11. You will never find real evidence to support you CD ideas. You ignore all rational explanations.

I have found zero evidence to support CD or any ideas from 9/11 truth. And you have not presented facts to support them either.

Do not use the official source, I can use 9/11 truth sources and solve 9/11. It is pathetic the weave of junk that the truth movement impeaches itself. Sad group, 9/11 truth. I can watch Loose Change videos and solve 9/11. It is so ironic. I can take your post and prove CD did not happen. 9/11 truth is so easy to show wrong.

 

[Tony Szamboti]

Oh come on now. Clinton and his cronies were in power for 8 years, right up until 9 months before the attack. Don't be just blaming BUSH and the Neocons...it goes much deeper. The NWO is not partisan. When Hillary gets back in power, you know it will only continue....BAHHHAAAHAAAAHAAA!!!

TAM

Maybe you are right on Clinton. However, that still doesn't change my contention that there should have been no political appointees involved in the investigations. The one problem with your involvement of Clinton's people is that they would not be in control of the investigation. Even so, I think a legitimate investigation would still have had questions for members of his administration though and they wouldn't have just involved why they didn't get Osama Bin Laden.

 

[T.A.M.]

So who should have been on the commission???

TAM

 

[Tony Szamboti]

Based on your present rate of uncovering real evidence, I predict you will solve 9/11 by 2173. (based on the rate you have shown rational evidence of any thing for the past 5 plus years)

No it is NAZI like propaganda coming from the 9/11 truth movement. The 9/11 truth movement is a one way propaganda machine, like NAZIs. The 9/11 truth movement is like a NAZI propaganda machine. I have been a victim of the NAZI like tactics at different truth forums and other places. I have been threatened and called a criminal for my beliefs, you truthers are like NAZIs. .

You have a problem. Open and independent papers and research has been done. Some of it is proprietary and you will be given the results when you build your next 1 billion dollar building. Independent papers are in academic journals, professional journal. The number of independent world wide studies is more than you will ever need to solve 9/11. The CD stuff is proved wrong on 9/11, and you are just not putting the evidence together.

9/11 truth is the closed minded society that calls everyone who knows the truth closed minded. They are the little kid group, that says no you are closed minded. What a bunch of pathetic false information spewing people, 9/11 truth.

I did not form anything from official reports. I knew on 9/11 that the WTC fell due to impact, fire, and failure. I have seen structural steel fail so quick in a fire. I fly airplanes, I love physics, I always liked science. But 9/11 without any help was so easy with my back ground in the USAF, engineering, and other experiences. I knew at the second impact OBL was a player, I knew when the WTC fell, it was impact, fire and failure. I think it is cool when I read a paper that confirms my calculations and observations. I find it real dumb that 9/11 truth makes up the explosive stuff when they know the witnesses are talking about sounds. I have also been around blasts, and I observed no blasts on 9/11. You will never find real evidence to support you CD ideas. You ignore all rational explanations.

I have found zero evidence to support CD or any ideas from 9/11 truth. And you have not presented facts to support them either.

Listen real hard there Beach. It isn't my job or yours to take over for a poor investigation. We don't have the tools at our disposal and those who do didn't use them. That is the problem.

I did have a hard time not laughing at your contention that open and independent research has been done but that it won't be available until the next billion dollar building is built. Do you realize that you just stated an oxymoron?

 

[T.A.M.]

So are you suggesting that when ever an act of terrorism is perpetrated on the citizens of a country, that that countries leaders should not form a commission to investigate what happened??? Is that what you are suggesting????

TAM

 

[R.Mackey]

I am saying human nature is the same today as it was four centuries ago. Only the issues have changed.

I didn't claim anything. How many times do I have to tell you I said "I think that the controversial nature is the reason"

That's a claim. It's speculation. I think the reason is that "Truth Movement" papers are wrong, and that it has nothing to do with politics. Like I said above, I can show that they are wrong, and I also can show that they fail the written requirements of any legitimate journal.

Do you think Greg Urich is right that the actual mass of the towers was significantly lower than the pruported 500,000 tons each?

I wrote one of those "Space Beams are Nonsense" whitepapers which were used to put James Fetzer and Judy Wood to bed on that.

Yes, I do. That estimate was round and soft to begin with, and a comparison against the Sears Tower suggested that a figure of ~350,000 tons was more credible. We also have to define clearly what mass is included, since the basement and sublevels will be far more massive per floor than anything else in the structure.

Furthermore, comparison against the NIST models reveals that NIST also feels the mass was lower. NIST and Gregory Urich, after the latter revised his calculations, are within about 10% of each other. Not bad. See here for the latest. I still feel this is a bit low owing to difficulties in estimating live loads, but I think these results are well within experimental uncertainty.

Of course, since NIST's numbers agree, then Gregory has not refuted the NIST collapse model in any way -- if anything he's confirmed it.

Now, then, nobody's stopping the "Truth Movement" from publishing anything. Go to it. Tell us what happened. I'm all ears.

 

[Tony Szamboti]

So are you suggesting that when ever an act of terrorism is perpetrated on the citizens of a country, that that countries leaders should not form a commission to investigate what happened??? Is that what you are suggesting????

TAM

No, if you were listening I said that there should have been no conflicts of interest. There were many conflicts of interest on the 911 Commission. I gave you one in Philip Zelikow. Another easily discernable one is Richard Ben-Veniste whose law firm was representing Unocal, who had a lot to gain from the removal of the Taliban with their intent to build an oil and gas pipeline through Afghanistan to the Caspian area, about which the Taliban was not cooperative and had given the contract to a Unocal competitior from Argentina named Bridas Corporation.