AE911Truth Watch

[Dave_46]

Chris

You are seeking to suggest, implicitly or explicitly, that 283 (or thereby) is a significant number. In effect you are trying to appeal to their collected authority.

<snip>

Please forgive my ignorance, but are these 283 people from that list on a website that contains:

a) known false entries, put there to test the checking system of the site

and b) people who do not support the conjectures on the site.

Dave

 

[Architect]

Please forgive my ignorance, but are these 283 people from that list on a website that contains:

a) known false entries, put there to test the checking system of the site

and b) people who do not support the conjectures on the site.

Dave

Aye, apparently.

 

[jberryhill]

Have you tracked down all these people and asked them if they remember that particular column?

I tracked down the guy who took the picture of it, yes, and posted about that upthread.

 

[Christopher7]

Please forgive my ignorance, but are these 283 people from that list on a website that contains:

a) known false entries, put there to test the checking system of the site

Someone lied, committed fraud, and then faults AE 911 Truth.
They check out applicants before posting their names, so the information was verifiable.
They were not expecting 'dirty tricks'.
Who makes this claim?
What was the name, title and other false information given to AE911 Truth?
Is it still there?
[I hope you don't expect anyone to take the word of someone who is admittedly, a liar.]

and b) people who do not support the conjectures on the site.
Dave

Dr. Quintiere agrees with AE 911 Truth that “the official conclusion that NIST arrived at is questionable.” and is calling for for an independent review of NIST’s investigation into the collapses of the World Trade Center Towers on 9/11.

His full statement was posted, including the part where he made it clear he was not a supporter of theories that the Twin Towers were brought down by pre-planted explosives.

Dr. Quintiere said that WTC 7"collapsed into a pile of rubble in less than 8 seconds*".
"In addition to NIST’s failure to provide an explanation, absolutely no mention of Building 7’s collapse appears in the 9/11 Commission's "full and complete account of the circumstances surrounding the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks."
“In my opinion, the WTC investigation by NIST falls short of expectations by not definitively finding cause, by not sufficiently linking recommendations of specificity to cause, by not fully invoking all of their authority to seek facts in the investigation, and by the guidance of government lawyers to deter rather than develop fact finding.
This is a PC way of saying "The NIST report is a sham".

*Most people define 'the building' as the entire building, not just a portion of it.
Only those who wish the obfuscate the facts insist otherwise.

 

[Christopher7]

I tracked down the guy who took the picture of it, yes, and posted about that upthread.

Would you post his email please?

 

[Arus808]

Someone lied, committed fraud, and then faults AE 911 Truth.

again you place blame on t hose who found the GLARING hole in the AE911 truth website and their acceptance of membership to their website; instead of AE911 , who should have since day 1 been checking the credentials of those who do sign up to make sure they say they are the person they claim to be

the fact that thye STILL have names on there that have BEEN told to them, that they are FAKE, shows exactly how not credible the website and its members are.

They check out applicants before posting their names, so the information was verifiable.

If they did, I wouldn't be seeing no less than 4 names on that list, that are of FAKE people

They were not expecting 'dirty tricks'.

Oh yes they are. they continue to list fake people, when they were told that they weren't real.

What was the name, title and other false information given to AE911 Truth?

the website owners know who they are.

Is it still there?

yes, 4 names that I can see that are still there.

Dr. Quintiere agrees with AE 911 Truth that “the official conclusion that NIST arrived at is questionable.” and is calling for for an independent review of NIST’s investigation into the collapses of the World Trade Center Towers on 9/11.

false, you mis read his claims and are putting words into his mouth

 

[Christopher7]

you guys have this blind faith in the NIST report, that doesn't explain the collapses, even though the Bush administration is known to systematically distort scientific documents.
Why do you still believe Dick Cheney and his front man/cheerleader/idiot?

I assume you're referring to events such as Dr. Hansen and climate research?

No
I was referring to this:
Scientists Say Administration Distorts Facts

By JAMES GLANZ
Published: February 19, 2004
More than 60 influential scientists, including 20 Nobel laureates, issued a statement yesterday asserting that the Bush administration had systematically distorted scientific fact in the service of policy goals on the environment, health, biomedical research and nuclear weaponry at home and abroad.
http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?sec=technology&res=9A00E2DD133DF93AA25751C0A9629C8B63

Dr Quintere: "“In my opinion, the WTC investigation by NIST falls short of expectations ....... by the guidance of government lawyers to deter rather than develop fact finding."

 

[Christopher7]

again you place blame on t hose who found the GLARING hole in the AE911 truth website and their acceptance of membership to their website; instead of AE911 , who should have since day 1 been checking the credentials of those who do sign up to make sure they say they are the person they claim to be

They do check the credentials. Your liar gave the name and information of a qualified person.

the fact that thye STILL have names on there that have BEEN told to them, that they are FAKE, shows exactly how not credible the website and its members are.

What are the names?

they continue to list fake people, when they were told that they weren't real.

Source?

Dr. Quintiere agrees with AE 911 Truth that “the official conclusion that NIST arrived at is questionable.” and is calling for for an independent review of NIST’s investigation into the collapses of the World Trade Center Towers on 9/11.

false, you mis read his claims and are putting words into his mouth

I quoted him verbatim.

 

[Arus808]

They do check the credentials.

If they did, the 4 names wouldn't still be there. No amount of your lying on their behalf changes their laxed nature.

Your liar gave the name and information of a qualified person.

no, 2 of the four are of fictional characters (one is found on the Simpsons)
So much for your "verification" process. The other two, are made up names; all four are not even of anyone that is remotely qualified (unless you think that a known home makers, who does knitting on public access tv is qualified as an engineer)

What are the names?

The owners of the website, have been told which names were fake.

 

[Architect]

[shakes head wearily]

So, Chris, you're not going to address the point that 283 is, in fact, a tiny proportion of the people that are qualified to comment on, and understand, the issues presented in the 911 report and that by seeking to rely on this - apparently unreliable - number you are placing undue emphasis on a minority view?

Or is it solely your contention that the silent masses of trained professionals do not represent general acceptance of the NIST findings?

 

[uk_dave]

Or is it solely your contention that the silent masses of trained professionals do not represent general acceptance of the NIST findings?

Well that appears to be how his fellow 'truther', LastChild, views the world.

If people in a professional field do not explicitly come out and state that they support the findings of a report which directly effects the very thing they specialise in, then 'truthers' are prepared to claim that those professionals are agnostic at best, and at worst 'critical' of the report.

It's a weird and wacky and very amusing world 'truthers' inhabit.

 

[Christopher7]

no, 2 of the four are of fictional characters (one is found on the Simpsons)

What are the names?

The owners of the website, have been told which names were fake.

How do you know?

 

[uk_dave]

They shouldn't need to be told if Doug Plumb was actually doing his job properly.

 

[Christopher7]

So, Chris, you're not going to address the point that 283 is, in fact, a tiny proportion of the people that are qualified to comment on

Who are you to say that someone with a degree in architecture or engineering isn't qualified to look at the evidence and make an educated judgment.

How many qualified people have studied the evidence and the NIST report, and personally gone on record saying they support the NIST conclusions?

Or is it solely your contention that the silent masses of trained professionals do not represent general acceptance of the NIST findings?

It cannot be assumed one way or the other.

 

[Brainache]

They shouldn't need to be told if Doug Plumb was actually doing his job properly.

Am I the only person who reads that guy's name as Plug Dumb?

Probably.

 

[Christopher7]

They shouldn't need to be told if Doug Plumb was actually doing his job properly.

So, you don't even know the names.

You are taking the word of someone who says they are lying and posting phony names.
Did it occur to you that perhaps they are lying about the whole thing?

 

[Christopher7]

Eight Senior Republican Appointees Challenge Official Account of 9/11 - "Not Possible", "a Whitewash", "False"
http://www.opednews.com/articles/genera_alan_mil_071202_seven_senior_republi.htm
http://www.opednews.com/articles/genera_alan_mil_071202_seven_senior_republi.htm

Paul Craig Roberts, PhD, Assistant Secretary of the Treasury under President Ronald Reagan


Catherine Austin Fitts, Assistant Secretary of Housing under President George H.W. Bush


Morgan Reynolds, PhD, former Chief Economist of the U.S. Department of Labor under current President George W. Bush


Col. Ronald D. Ray, U.S. Marine Corps (ret), Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense under President Ronald ReaganMary Schiavo, JD, Inspector General of the U.S. Department of Transportation under Presidents George H.W. Bush and William Clinton


Mary Schiavo. Appointed under the administration of President George H. W. Bush, Ms. Schiavo served as the Inspector General for the U.S. Department of Transportation from 1990 - 1996.


Barbara Honegger, served as Special Assistant to the Chief Domestic Policy Adviser to President Ronald Reagan and as a White House Policy Analyst.


Edward Peck, Deputy Director of the White House Task Force on Terrorism under President Ronald Reagan. Former Deputy Coordinator, Covert Intelligence Programs at the U.S. State Department. Former U.S. Ambassador and Chief of Mission in Iraq


Morton Goulder, Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense for Intelligence and Warning under Presidents Richard Nixon, Gerald Ford and Jimmy Carter.

 

[Christopher7]

Well that appears to be how his fellow 'truther', LastChild, views the world.

If people in a professional field do not explicitly come out and state that they support the findings of a report which directly effects the very thing they specialise in, then 'truthers' are prepared to claim that those professionals are agnostic at best, and at worst 'critical' of the report.

Really?
Please show where i said that.

Just the poopsite is true.
quote [x]
Considering that you reject the work of the thousands (or tens of thousands) mentioned in Architects

 

[uk_dave]

Did it occur to you that perhaps they are lying about the whole thing?

Right back 'atcha.

Do you ever question the information you're being fed by people you have no knowledge about?

I don't really care whether or not there are fake names on the aetruth website. It amuses me that Gage was stupid enough, or naive enough, to think he could set up his organisation and claim to the world that 'Architects and Engineers' disagree with the accepted account of 9-11, without having the decency to make a distinction between engineers who actually deal with structural building design, or even engineers who still work for a living, but rather just go for quantity over quality to the extent that he didn't even have vetting procedures in place, and yet he believed that this scam wouldn't be revealed within minutes of his site going live.

Or maybe he didn't (doesn't) care because he knew there'd be a few useful.... people... out there who would be willing to defend him come what may.

 

[Christopher7]

Right back 'atcha.
Do you ever question the information you're being fed by people you have no knowledge about?

I have done my own research and i concur with the conclusions of AE 911 Truth.

I don't really care whether or not there are fake names on the aetruth website.

Some people here are making a big deal of it based on the word of a liar.

It amuses me that Gage was stupid enough, or naive enough, to think he could set up his organisation and claim to the world that 'Architects and Engineers' disagree with the accepted account of 9-11, without having the decency to make a distinction between engineers who actually deal with structural building design, or even engineers who still work for a living,

He lists members by category and gives their qualifications.
Architects (Degreed & Licensed - Active & Retired)
Architectural Professionals (Degreed)
Engineers (Degreed & Licensed - Active & Retired)
Engineering Professionals (Degreed)
Non-U.S. Architects and Engineers & Architectural and Engineering Professionals
Other Supporters and A&E Students


Richard Gage has been honest and straightforward about the qualifications of the members of AE 911 truth.
You are desperately trying to spin diversity into dishonesty because you can't accept reality.
286 professional architects and engineers don't believe the official story and are demanding that the 9/11 investigation be re-opened, and must include a full inquiry into the possible use of explosives that may have been the actual cause behind the destruction of the World Trade Center Towers and WTC Building 7.

You didn't [nor will you] answer this question:
Did it occur to you that perhaps your liar is lying about the whole thing?