NASA Engineer (ret.) is a Twoofie?

[beachnut]

...

It's kind of hard to argue when the first words of the NASA release is "Mr. Dwain A. Deets has been appointed Director" Perhaps, you're the liar.
...

Wow, a director who went nuts; why do physics majors go nut on 911 issues? Must be about 0.001 percent of physics majors, the same for engineers, and pilots. Wow, you are trying to support an idiot on 911 issues. This is what you do, protect the challenged on 911 issues. No idea too stupid to support the dolt making the claim; your job?

Deets is a nut on 911. Go ahead prove one of Deets claims on 911. You can't.

Deets is a failure on 911 issues. Go ahead try to save him and explain what he got right about 911? Doubt his NASA work helped him to become an idiot on 911 issues, he must of done that on his own delusional mind.

What you got? Wait, you are still hung up on Gravy, doubt you can get some evidence to save Deets idiotic lies on 911. Good luck.

 

[BigAl]

From El Mundo's Quote:

If it's a lie, you'd have to take it up with NASA. It's straight from their website.

It's kind of hard to argue when the first words of the NASA release is "Mr. Dwain A. Deets has been appointed Director" Perhaps, you're the liar.
.

Someone at AE911 inflated his job description. AE911truth has done that before.

According to this NASA announcement, he was a director of a department (aka project office), not Director of NASA or Dryden or Edwards. He served under Edwards Center Director Kenneth J. Szalai.

Mr. Dwain A. Deets has been appointed Director, Aerospace Projects Office at the NASA Dryden Flight Research Center, Edwards, CA, Center Director Kenneth J. Szalai announced recently.

http://www.nasa.gov/centers/dryden/news/NewsReleases/1996/96-10.html​

 

[RedIbis]

Someone at AE911 inflated his job description. AE911truth has done that before.

According to this NASA announcement, he was a director of a department (aka project office), not Director of NASA or Dryden or Edwards. He served under Edwards Center Director Kenneth J. Szalai.

I don't think anyone claimed he was the Director of NASA, but a NASA Director. This point was already made by Oystein.

 

[R.Mackey]

For those of you struggling with the English language:

NASA Director != director of a program or project within NASA

Conspiracy Theory != any theory that involves collusion legally defined as a conspiracy

Truth Movement != people moving anywhere at all, let alone in the direction of the truth​

This has been a public service announcement. The more you know, the more you grow.

 

[Baylor]

I don't know what keyboard function this is ≠ but I saw someone post it, then copied it and saved it in my personal notepad.

 

[Dog Town]

It's so cute how Twoofers are so eager, to appeal to any "authority" they can find! No matter the level.

One question:
Does their "authority" have any evidence to support their fantasies?

Evidence based in reality would be nice. Sadly for them, it's always another FAIL!

 

[ozeco41]

Deets was active for some time on the Richard Dawkins Net Forum - from memory he made on and off appearances through 2008-2009. Username there dadeets. In his early posts he seemed genuine sceptic but became more obvious truther as time passed. The situation seemed to get too strong for him and he faded away. I then saw his name on AE911 where he is credited with doing the paperwork to get them the Tax exemption. US folk will know the section "501 or something c" IIRC???

 

[R.Mackey]

Typically a "501(c)3" organization, i.e. listed as a public charity or private foundation under IRS code, 26 US Constitution section 501(c). I'm assuming they consider themselves an "educational" or "scientific" organization, which is the third type on the list.

One of the stipulations is that they have to be nonpolitical in nature. I guess crazy is nonpolitical.

I'll be interested to see their financial reporting when it comes out.

 

[ozeco41]

Typically a "501(c)3" organization, i.e. listed as a public charity or private foundation under IRS code, 26 US Constitution section 501(c). I'm assuming they consider themselves an "educational" or "scientific" organization, which is the third type on the list.

One of the stipulations is that they have to be nonpolitical in nature. I guess crazy is nonpolitical.

I'll be interested to see their financial reporting when it comes out.

Thanks Ryan. I have a law degree - gained at age 60 plus and never practised - but studied Australian Constitutional law as you would expect for an Aussie. Lots of time on other forums has allowed/encouraged me to learn US Constitutional Law - mostly following the Gay Marriage developments in California on the Dawkins forum - then moving to rationalskepticism.

Surely the only legitimate goal of a truther organisation is political???? (Whether I believe them or not.)

 

[RedIbis]

For those of you struggling with the English language:

NASA Director != director of a program or project within NASA

Conspiracy Theory != any theory that involves collusion legally defined as a conspiracy

Truth Movement != people moving anywhere at all, let alone in the direction of the truth​

This has been a public service announcement. The more you know, the more you grow.

You said the press release was a lie. The press release was posted by NASA. Are you saying NASA lied?

 

[LashL]

You said the press release was a lie. The press release was posted by NASA. Are you saying NASA lied?

The "press release" that R.Mackey was referring to was one that Fonebone posted, not a NASA press release. Nice try, though.

This one: PRESS RELEASE: November 19, 2009

Contact: Colorado911Visibility.org
Don Plummer, 970-234-4430

FORMER NASA DIRECTOR SAYS THE WORLD TRADE CENTER TOWERS WERE FELLED BY CONTROLLED DEMOLITION

 

[T.A.M.]

So do we have a consensus here...this guy, at some point in his NASA career, was a program director for the organization...correct.

As others have said, does he actually bring anything new to the table using his NASA skills?

TAM

 

[RedIbis]

The "press release" that R.Mackey was referring to was one that Fonebone posted, not a NASA press release. Nice try, though.

This one: PRESS RELEASE: November 19, 2009

Contact: Colorado911Visibility.org
Don Plummer, 970-234-4430

FORMER NASA DIRECTOR SAYS THE WORLD TRADE CENTER TOWERS WERE FELLED BY CONTROLLED DEMOLITION

This was posted after Fonebone posted the NASA link that calls Deets a Director.

So was Deets a NASA Director? Yes or no, please.

 

[RedIbis]

Mackey also disparages Deets by stating, "Mr. Deets was a semi-technical middle manager."

Does this appear to be the resume of a "semi-technical middle manager":

Before this appointment, Deets became Director, Research Engineering Division in March 1994 and served as acting division chief from 1990 to 1994. In that position, he directed the research and engineering aspects of the flight research programs at Dryden.



He led the preparation of the Dryden response to the NASA Federal Laboratory Review. He was Chairman of the NASA Non-Advocate Review of the Reusable Launch Vehicle (RLV) program in 1995, and will again serve in the capacity for the 1996 review

In 1986 Deets completed a special assignment at NASA Headquarters, Washington, D.C., where he led an effort to define the needs for flight research and flight testing within NASA. He then headed development of a flight research strategy for what was then NASA's Office of Aeronautics and Space Technology, now called the Office of Aeronautics. This effort led to a major increase in emphasis on flight research by NASA.

Bolded to make it easier on you to answer the simple question.

 

[Disbelief]

Mackey also disparages Deets by stating, "Mr. Deets was a semi-technical middle manager."

Does this appear to be the resume of a "semi-technical middle manager":



Bolded to make it easier on you to answer the simple question.

Possibly. Not knowing the organizational structure, he could very well have been a semi-technical middle manager.

So was Deets a NASA Director? Yes or no, please.

No, he was a Director at NASA. Living the corporate life, there is a distinction, at least IMO.

 

[RedIbis]

Possibly. Not knowing the organizational structure, he could very well have been a semi-technical middle manager.



No, he was a Director at NASA. Living the corporate life, there is a distinction, at least IMO.

You conradict yourself by saying that you don't know the organizational structure and then you say that he was living the corporate life.

Talk about making a distinction without a difference. What's the difference between a NASA Director and a Director at NASA?

What would you guys do without semantics?

 

[Disbelief]

You conradict yourself by saying that you don't know the organizational structure and then you say that he was living the corporate life.

I'm talking about me living the corporate life and that is what I based my opinion from.

Talk about making a distinction without a difference. What's the difference between a NASA Director and a Director at NASA?

A NASA director sounds like being THE person in charge of NASA, while a director at NASA sounds more like one of many. Once again, that is my personal opinion based upon my personal experience.

What would you guys do without semantics?

Spare me Red, as you are one of the biggest arguers of semantics on the board. I presented evidence to you in the other thread, which you requested, and you never acknowledged or attempted refutation.

 

[Reheat]

Mackey also disparages Deets by stating, "Mr. Deets was a semi-technical middle manager."

Does this appear to be the resume of a "semi-technical middle manager":

Hay Red, Are we supposed to believe that your intelligence and intuition after reading a press release exceeds that of Ryan Mackey?

 

[TexasJack]

Who cares if he is a director at NASA or the director of NASA? Where's the beef? Red, you can continue this appeal to authority all day, but what has he written or said about 9/11 that he can personally back up with a technical paper he has authored? Anything? I didn't think so.

 

[T.A.M.]

You conradict yourself by saying that you don't know the organizational structure and then you say that he was living the corporate life.

Talk about making a distinction without a difference. What's the difference between a NASA Director and a Director at NASA?

What would you guys do without semantics?

You are playing games here also Red. You know damn well the reason the distinction needs to be made is to counter the obvious appeal to authority being made by truthers, using the vagueness of the term to imply that this man was the director OF NASA.

Where I use to work, we had a gentleman who was known as the Medical Director. So does that mean he was director of all medicine? Does it mean he was director over all things medical locally? No, it meant he was the Beurocrat who was responsible to deal with the Physicians in matters related to the local health board...that it all.

TAM