Quotes from Dr. Quintiere and Dr. Astaneh-Asl = EVIDENCE

[deep]

Dr. Quintiere's position on the Truth movement's idiotic "controlled demolition" hypothesis is pretty damn clear, too. Why are you dismissing it as "irrelevant"?

Because his opinion about any alternate theory has no relevance to whether or not the NIST report lacks scientific integrity (hence, it's "irrelevant"). In other words, his opinion is lacking the same scientific integrity he's demanding from NIST.

I'm sorry that you're having such a hard time understanding this, but there are limits to what I can explain. I will not continue repeating myself.

 

[bio]

Because his opinion about any alternate theory has no relevance to whether or not the NIST report lacks scientific integrity (hence, it's "irrelevant"). In other words, his opinion is lacking the same scientific integrity he's demanding from NIST.

I'm sorry that you're having such a hard time understanding this, but there are limits to what I can explain. I will not continue repeating myself.

Are you ignoring Dr. Astaneh-Asl quotes here in this thread?

 

[deep]

Dr. Quintiere in no way, shape or form criticizes or disagrees with any of the NIST report's ultimate conclusions.

A criticism of an aspect of the NIST report in no way, shape, or form serves as criticism of the report as a whole.

Post all the out of context quotes you want, deep44. It doesn't change the fact that you are wrong just like the dozens of other Truthers that have posted those exact same quotes were wrong.

You're just in denial, and your accusation that I'm taking quotes "out of context" is a sign of desperation with no basis in reality.

As for criticizing an "aspect" of the NIST report, I purposely included this quote, and even bolded the most important part:

I would really like to see someone else take a look at what they've done; both structurally and from a fire point of view.
​

There goes your "certain aspect" argument, which was undoubtedly referring to the portion of the report related to fire. Just to be clear- in the context of his presentation at the 2007 World Fire Safety Conference, that quote removes all doubt as to which portions of the report he was referring to.

You probably haven't even seen the presentation I'm referring to, yet you're telling me I'm taking the quote out of context. The amount of intellectual dishonesty in this forum is, at times, appalling.

 

[deep]

Are you ignoring Dr. Astaneh-Asl quotes here in this thread?

I'm not purposely ignoring anyone who isn't on my ignore list (which contains around 10-12 names); however, I'm only one person, so I can't reply to every single message when I have to repeat myself five times to every person who responds.

..if that's even what you're referring to.

 

[bio]

Is it scientific to ignore Dr. Astaneh-Asl quotes, which you posted here?

 

[deep]

You put "minor criticism" in quotes, yet I never said that (nor has anyone else in this thread other than you). Perhaps you made a mistake?

Yes, I did make a mistake. In one of the original threads about Dr. Quintiere, I recall the term "minor criticism" being thrown around quite a bit. Then, when I read your response, I accidentally substituted that in for "could be improved upon".

Also, yes, it's the NFPA conference. The recording is available to the public for $13 ($15 on CD) through fleetwoodonsite.com - not sure if your membership includes access to those recordings, but if so, look for the session labeled "T54".

 

[Mel Odious]

Because his opinion about any alternate theory has no relevance to whether or not the NIST report lacks scientific integrity (hence, it's "irrelevant"). In other words, his opinion is lacking the same scientific integrity he's demanding from NIST.

I'm sorry that you're having such a hard time understanding this, but there are limits to what I can explain. I will not continue repeating myself.

Welcome to the August Stundie nominations page, deep44.

 

[deep]

Is it scientific to ignore Dr. Astaneh-Asl quotes, which you posted here?

How could I ignore his quotes if I posted them here? I gathered them together and incorporated them into my original message. How is that "ignoring" them?

Can you be more specific?

 

[deep]

Welcome to the August Stundie nominations page, deep44.

Welcome to my ignore list, Mel Odious.

 

[Sizzler]

I support Deep on this issue. The "no evidence" line is completely at odds with reasonable insight.

I think you made a good attempt here! Good luck with this. I suppose Mackey won't be back. I think we had a discussion a few months back about the molten steel quotes. The word "melted" only means "melted" when he sees fit.

 

[Mel Odious]

Welcome to my ignore list, Mel Odious.

No doubt I'm in good company ...

 

[Arus808]

deep didn't read the paper, as evidenced by his cherry picked quote. yet he ignores that Quintierre only had issue with the fireproofing, overlooking the fact that in Quintierre's suggestion, fire proofing didn't need to be dislodged for the buildings to collapse

Why do the resident kooks, think that Quintierre supports their claims, when he does not?

reading comprehension seems to be the bane of the troof movement.

 

[Sizzler]

deep didn't read the paper, as evidenced by his cherry picked quote. yet he ignores that Quintierre only had issue with the fireproofing, overlooking the fact that in Quintierre's suggestion, fire proofing didn't need to be dislodged for the buildings to collapse

Why do the resident kooks, think that Quintierre supports their claims, when he does not?

reading comprehension seems to be the bane of the troof movement.

It depends which claim one uses Quintierre's quotes to support. That is Deep's point. Check OP's claim one more time.

Perhaps we could all improve our reading comprehension.

 

[deep]

Sizzler - thank you for taking the time to read everything, and for your kind words.

Hopefully others will see that what I'm suggesting is not at all unreasonable.

 

[leftysergeant]

Is it scientific to ignore Dr. Astaneh-Asl quotes, which you posted here?

What in Astineh's comments supports CD? Class A fires get hot enouigh to make steel turn red-hot, to warp and to bend under weight.

What significance do you attach to the "vaporized" steel? Thermite would not do that. Sulphuric acid would. There was a lot of that in the pile of WTC 7.

 

[deep]

What in Astineh's comments supports CD? Class A fires get hot enouigh to make steel turn red-hot, to warp and to bend under weight.

What significance do you attach to the "vaporized" steel? Thermite would not do that. Sulphuric acid would. There was a lot of that in the pile of WTC 7.

As I stated in the OP - nothing. His comments corroborate the numerous other reports of molten steel at GZ - that's all. I'm not implying that molten steel is indicative of a therm*te reaction, controlled demolition, or anything else.

 

[LashL]

A few days ago, R. Mackey made several desperate attempts to explain why certain quotes from Dr. Quintiere and Dr. Astaneh-Asl were irrelevant to any argument in support of 9/11 truth. I would like to take a few moments to further demonstrate the absurdity of his claim.<snipped a whole lot of nonsensical blather>

Hoo boy. The day that you honestly believe that R. Mackey was making "desperate" attempts to educate you and your fellow tinhatters (the only people who are clearly incapable of understanding facts and reality) may well be the day that your family ought to commit you to a secure facility for your own safety and the safety of others. R. Mackey is so patient and so diligent in his legitimate efforts to educate people, including the ineducable, that he deserves a medal for doing so. He can hardly be faulted for failing to reach the few, such as yourself, who steadfastly refuse to learn, and refuse to acknowledge facts and reality.

there are limits to what I can explain.

No kidding.

I will not continue repeating myself.

Promises, promises.

 

[lee5]

Deep44, you didn't answer my last post so will you please try this time. I will keep is smaller.

Suppose I give you what your looking for which is conceding that NIST had some questionable procedures. Or whatever it is your trying to get across.

Please answer this question.....

Does that make the conclusion incorrect?

A simple yes or no will do.

 

[deep]

He can hardly be faulted for failing to reach the few, such as yourself, who steadfastly refuse to learn, and refuse to acknowledge facts and reality.

I've provided facts, in the form of numerous quotes (and their respective sources), to support both of my arguments.

R. Mackey has insulted me and accused me of taking quotes out of context, without providing any specific examples of the context the quotes were allegedly removed from.

I would defend my position, but there's nothing to defend it against.

 

[LashL]

I've provided facts, in the form of numerous quotes (and their respective sources), to support both of my arguments.

No, you have not.

R. Mackey has insulted me and accused me of taking quotes out of context, without providing any specific examples of the context the quotes were allegedly removed from.

No, he has not. You have, indeed, taken quotes out of context and bastardized them for your own purposes and beyond their legitimate meaning. It is not an insult to point out this reality.

I would defend my position, but there's nothing to defend it against.

No, you cannot defend your position because your position is illegitimate and indefensible.