• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Heiwa article accepted at AsCE

R.Mackey said:
This is not the only time this has happened. See, for instance, the letter from Frank Gourley that ACSE "published," along with Dr. Bazant's rather scathing response.
Click to expand...

Ha, just read that via your link.
The interdisciplinary interests of Gourley, a chemical engineer
with a doctorate in jurisprudence, are appreciated. Although none
of the discusser’s criticisms is scientifically correct, his discussion
provides a welcome opportunity to dispel doubts recently voiced
by some in the community outside structural mechanics and engineering...

Closing Comments
Although everyone is certainly entitled to express his or her opinion
on any issue of concern, interested critics should realize that,
to help discern the truth about an engineering problem such as the
WTC collapse, it is necessary to become acquainted with the
relevant material from an appropriate textbook on structural mechanics.
Click to expand...

Ouch. I wonder if Heiwa would even notice the smackdown if Bazant could be bothered with another similar reply this time.
 
scott.in.taiwan said:
Jesus Christ. Thank you for clarifying this point. This makes it an entirely different matter. Letters get published for no reason at all. Bill could publish a letter if he/she/it wanted to. This means nothing at all about the status of his claims.

Why is it even up here then? Except to make it appear as if Truth Gurus are able to publish their beliefs in genuine academic forums? 911 Truth remains the domain of high school kids and the mentally deranged.

I guess the real point of this is that genuine scientists still aren't interested in this crap heap of an idea. Are you surprised?
Click to expand...
Going off the deep end Scott ? You should just call him Ryan, or Mr.Mackey. ' Jesus Christ ' seems ridiculously exggerated.
 
Finally! I'm very much looking forward to the comedy. Fun times lie ahead :D
 
bill smith said:
I mean it's not like in the war where 'Loose lips might sink ships ' is it ? Ships of State possibly tough. lol
Click to expand...

More thinly veiled twoofer America-hatred Bill?

Preemptively jerking off on the corpse of the USA (while bizarrely claiming to be patriots) is the twoofers second favorite pastime after doing it on the graves of the victims of 9/11.
 
bill smith said:
Going off the deep end Scott ? You should just call him Ryan, or Mr.Mackey. ' Jesus Christ ' seems ridiculously exggerated.
Click to expand...

Personally I am very much looking forward to Bazant's reply, if any. I think I know how strong Heiwa'a paper or ' discussion document ' will be. Here on the forum you guys were just able to cluster, bluster, deny and obfuscate but Bazant will not have that luxury or escape in the broad glare of the scientific community.

They will be looking with different eyes this time around so Bazant will be stretched very thin- like see-through thin. As you say 'fun times ahead'.
 
Last edited:
Not that the dismissal of Bazant makes much difference really. All it effectively does is remove the only existing fig leaf that the government has. Bazant was only ever a limiting case in the best of all possible worlds.

abut it is certainly better to let the emperor stand shivering with no clothes whatsoever rather than leave him even the thin rag offered by Bazant.
 
Last edited:
R.Mackey said:
Dr. Corotis is familiar with them. And Heiwa's empty headed letter speaks for itself. You'll see.

Personally I think some scientists occasionally enjoy the opportunity to demolish conspiracy-minded idiots in a public forum. I'd have simply rejected the letter as too stupid to be worth addressing, but it's their call.
Click to expand...
If these discusssion papers are not reviewed for scientific validity orior to publication then on what grounds are they published ? I think you are telling porkie pies here Ryan.
 
Last edited:
Not that the dismissal of Bazant makes much difference really. All it effectively does is remove the only existing fig leaf that the government has. Bazant was only ever a limiting case in the best of all possible worlds.

abut it is certainly better to let the emperor stand shivering with no clothes whatsoever rather than leave him even the thin rag offered by Bazant.
Click to expand...
Stupid post like this expose and confirm truthers as the anti-intellectual cult members of a vapor movement. Nothing is too stupid or so nonsensical that is is not considered evidence by the fringe conspiracy theorist thriving on dirt dumb delusions. These insane statements are dishes of fresh brains for the zombies of the movent of delusional lies known as 911truth.

Bazant paper is a model truthers can't understand. 8 years of failed ideas and the best truthers can do is post delusional talk, no substance, just pure nonsense based on nothing.

Heiwa letter will be posted and there will be a rebuttal showing how dirt dumb Heiwa's ideas are, but couched in polite language that truthers and Heiwa will not understand the smack down. It happened before as posted above and it will happen again.

You can't say Bazant model is wrong you have to show it with calculations, something not possible in the delusional world of failed ideas all truthers live in. Got practical engineering skills, any rational thought? not in the truth movement, only 8 years of failure
 
bill smith said:
If these discusssion papers are not reviewed for scientific validity orior to publication then on what grounds are they published ? I think you are telling porkie pies here Ryan.
Click to expand...

Ah, a quick peek reaffirms why I've got BS on ignore.

Since BS is apparently so intrigued with the process, perhaps he/she/it can follow Ryan's advice 'Anyone who wants to verify this for themselves, you should contact Dr. Corotis, the editor in question.'.....but that would spoil everything, by answering the question. We wouldn't want that, would we? :cool:
 
More BS BS 'Bazant was only ever a limiting case in the best of all possible worlds.' LOL

He/She/It has no idea what that sentence means, apparently. I think you'd get more comprehension from a Parrot....'Squawk! 9/11 Was an Inside Job! 9/11 Was an Inside Job! Squawk!
'
 
R.Mackey said:
It's up here because nobody ever does a search. Seriously, every idea the Truthers have is here, beat to death, and quivering. Try it, you'll find it.
Click to expand...

I think thats why someone needs to make a thread or website that contains subject headers with links to various discussion threads. It may have been discussed before but sometimes its very hard to find something specific.
 
alienentity said:
Ah, a quick peek reaffirms why I've got BS on ignore.

Since BS is apparently so intrigued with the process, perhaps he/she/it can follow Ryan's advice 'Anyone who wants to verify this for themselves, you should contact Dr. Corotis, the editor in question.'.....but that would spoil everything, by answering the question. We wouldn't want that, would we? :cool:
Click to expand...

Yes I've noticed that quite a few of you guys have those faulty 'Ignore' buttons these days. Often ' situationally faulty ' it appears. But no matter.

Nah, Ryan says that they will publish without checking for scientific accuracy. So I would like to know what minimum criteria a scientific Journal like ''The Journal of Engineering Mechanics' might require to publish a technical discussion paper of some importance like this one of Heiwa's. Would good spelling be enough do you think ?
 
Last edited:
Edx said:
I think thats why someone needs to make a thread or website that contains subject headers with links to various discussion threads. It may have been discussed before but sometimes its very hard to find something specific.
Click to expand...

Trouble with that is, those discussion threads can get quite long and can sometimes derail onto side subjects that are still related to the original post, but also cover other information that might be of interest to someone. Such a website would probably contain literally thousands of entries, and whomever maintains it would have to link to particular posts, not just the thread.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom