"New Investigation"? Do your own; don't waste my tax dollars
- Thread starter 1337m4n
- Start date
-
- Tags
- new investigation bs
SezMe
post-pre-born
Right?
I've written several hundred pages on my analysis of the current conclusions, attempting to reconcile them with the (slight but still significant) differences of opinon found in scientific literature. I've also identified very clearly the problems that I still have, the potential impact, and specific answers I want to see in the NIST WTC 7 final report.
Additional investigation is going on all the time, some public, some private. There are new papers coming out every month or so and have been for several years. The problem is that the Truth Movement pays no attention to them, except on the rare occasions where they misinterpret these papers and mistakenly believe the new results support their opinion.
We've seen this here several times -- the Truth Movement claiming that Dr. Quintiere's results support them (wrong!), or that Dr. Astaneh-Asl's comments prove their theories (not even close). But once reality is explained to them, the subject is dropped, forever.
This is pretty conclusive proof that the Truth Movement doesn't want a "new investigation" at all. You've gotten that, several times over. What they want is an investigation that validates their beliefs. For that, you shall wait in vain.
Well well, two "debunk alerts" started by RedIbis, and again Red doesn't address any of the points raised by other posters.
I'm starting to see a pattern.
If I'm not mistaken, both of those originated on 9-11 Blogger, and RedIbis authored neither of them. He's only the messenger. No reason to shoot at him. Although I do wish he'd learn from his mistakes, and maybe then he'd stop bringing that tripe over here...
deep
Graduate Poster
- Joined
- Apr 19, 2007
- Messages
- 1,367
Not sure what you're referring to about Dr. Quintiere and Dr. Astaneh-Asl - they both support the truth movement's arguments, even if it's indirectly.
Dr. Quintiere said something along the lines of "I wish someone would peer-review [the NIST report]".
Dr. Astaneh-Asl corroborated the molten steel sightings at GZ.
It's the debunkers who say, "well, they don't believe the buildings were blown up, so their opinions are meaningless in the context of the 9/11 truth", which is untrue.
OK, where is the paper that explains how 20 ton steel beams were laterally ejected from WTC1 and WTC2 up to 500 feet away during the collapse?
No, they don't. Not one bit. Don't believe me? Ask them. Sizzler did. Read the threads.
You illustrate my point perfectly. Either through ignorance or incompetence, you aren't even dimly aware of the other, ongoing investigations, nor their conclusions. This rather moots your calls for more investigation, permanently.
No and no. Read the threads. Dr. Quintiere says "it's also possible for the WTC to collapse without fireproofing loss, and my experiments prove it." Dr. Astaneh-Asl was referring to eutectics, which we've explained to you at least a hundred octillion times.
No. The debunkers who understand their positions say "their data makes it even more plausible for fire to have been the cause of collapse, so no theory based on fire-based-collapse being impossible (e.g. the CD theory) has any merit whatsoever."
See my whitepaper, pages 96-98. Although practically anyone could have figured it out on their own, and many have.
The paper does not support the truth movement. Your analysis is wrong, and I guess this means you are a truther. –1
It may make you feel better to say the paper supports your false ideas, but you have failed to present evidence it support anything to do with 9/11 truth failed ideas. Please present some photos of the molten metal and explain what finding molten metal in the WTC ruble means? The fact is the truth movement can't figure out anything about 9/11.
Take a physics course and you can understand how a 100 TONs of TNT kinetic energy event, one tower falling, can eject objects with great force. But short of understanding physics you will remain in ignorance on this issue. I can tell you it is what would happen will not cut it. But for an engineer I take it for granted. But your false information truth movement can't help you either, combine your evidence with their evident, it still adds up to ZERO.
deep
Graduate Poster
- Joined
- Apr 19, 2007
- Messages
- 1,367
Yes, I understand that you've created your own interpretation of what they both said for the purpose of finding a reason to ignore them, but I'm just going by their direct quotes.
"I wish that there would be a peer review of this" - Dr. Quintere, in reference to portions of the NIST report.
"I saw melting of girders in [the] World Trade Center." - Dr. Astaneh-Asl
Neither quote is taken out of context in the sense that the meaning is being misrepresented. There are numerous other quotes from both men on the same subjects.
Thanks, I'll take a look. Where has your whitepaper been published? You specifically noted in an earlier message that these papers were being published roughly once per month.
Neither quote represents their positions accurately. You're quote-mining. You didn't even give sources. That may fool you, but not me.
I don't ignore them at all -- I've actually read, cited, and contrasted their papers.
Finally, what part of "contact them yourself if you don't believe me" are you struggling with?
It's freely available, no formal publication required. However, in my whitepaper, I also direct readers to several formally published papers. The list of notes is extensive, and I invite you to follow up with them directly.
Deep44,
Would you support a GRAND THEFT AUTO 5 JREF VERSUS DA TRUTH?
I picture you as playing a deep cover NWO counter terrorist type truther dude who is trying to get a peer reviewed paper across town in a convertible with a hot blond at your side.
LMK
Would you support a GRAND THEFT AUTO 5 JREF VERSUS DA TRUTH?
I picture you as playing a deep cover NWO counter terrorist type truther dude who is trying to get a peer reviewed paper across town in a convertible with a hot blond at your side.
LMK
But what's the overall meaning of what they have to say?
Does it support in any way a CD theory?
*Cue in Jeopardy theme*
deep
Graduate Poster
- Joined
- Apr 19, 2007
- Messages
- 1,367
Your need for an alternate interpretation is driven by cognitive dissonance. Neither of the quotes fit into your worldview "as-is", which is why you're struggling to find reasons to dismiss them: "quote mining", "not providing sources", "misrepresenting their position".
I'm not claiming that they support any of the theories put forward by the 9/11 truth movement, but they do support individual pieces of the puzzle. Dr. Quintere supports the truth movement's assertion that the NIST report lacks scientific integrity. Dr. Astaneh-Asl corroborates the dozens of other reports of molten steel at GZ.
Regarding your suggestion that I "contact them" - there's no reason to. If they suffered any negative backlash as a result of what they said, of course they're going to come up with some kind of excuse. I'm sure if we contact Michael Richards and ask him about his "N-word" rant while doing stand-up, he'll tell us we're misinterpreting what he said.
Both men were very clear in what they said, and those were not isolated quotes.
Ahh, well, I've learned from your fellow debunkers that scientific whitepapers are worthless unless they are peer-reviewed and published in a mainstream scientific journal. I'm sure you can appreciate that.
deep
Graduate Poster
- Joined
- Apr 19, 2007
- Messages
- 1,367
Deep, you're doing the same thing you accused Mackey of doing. See:
Except in your case I would slightly change it to: "you've created your own interpretation of what they both said for the purpose of finding a reason to support your theories"
It's patently what you did here:
Except in your case I would slightly change it to: "you've created your own interpretation of what they both said for the purpose of finding a reason to support your theories"
It's patently what you did here:
Alt+F4
diabolical globalist
- Joined
- Oct 29, 2006
- Messages
- 10,017
That has me thinking...how come the truthers (at least the truthers with a job in the US) didn't have a pact to combine thier federal stimulus checks and put it towards a new investigation? It was a free $600 per truther multiplied by the "obvious" thousands (if not millions
Well in order to get the stimulus check a person had to have earned at least $3,000 in 2007 - how many truthers do you think did?
I've always wondered why truthers with jobs pay their taxes, after all, how could someone in good conscience continue to give their hard earned money to the evil government that has murdered thousands.
Why do they cheer folks like Ed Brown from the sidelines rather than taking up the call themselves?
JimBenArm
Based on a true story!
- Joined
- Nov 8, 2006
- Messages
- 13,092
I don't understand. The government did the dastardly deed. The government can't be trusted. Yet, you want the investigation funded by the government, like this isn't going to influence the outcome? You know all the people that would get money would instantly lose their moral conviction, like all the engineers and firefighters did, since they would be dependent on the money for their livelyhood.
So, you'll have to fund it. Sorry, but that's the way it's gotta be. Otherwise, you have another instant "out" on this. "They wanted to come to different conclusions, but feared they wouldn't get the money." And you KNOW that's what would be said.
So, you'll have to fund it. Sorry, but that's the way it's gotta be. Otherwise, you have another instant "out" on this. "They wanted to come to different conclusions, but feared they wouldn't get the money." And you KNOW that's what would be said.