NASA Engineer (ret.) is a Twoofie?

[beachnut]

Asking this guy might help

Gray Creech
NASA Dryden public affairs

TAM

911 truth protector, red ibis, needs to call NASA and see if they know why Deets makes up lies and spreads them. Did they retire him because he went nuts?

 

[T.A.M.]

911 truth protector, red ibis, needs to call NASA and see if they know why Deets makes up lies and spreads them. Did they retire him because he went nuts?

I dunno, but his answers to the interview linked on page 4 reads like a Gage/DRG talking point memo. Even if his credentials are legit and unexaggerated, I haven't seen his speak to a single point using his alleged engineering knowledge...unlike Mackey.

TAM

 

[Childlike Empress]

I wonder if Captain bob will convince him of his stuff...then Craig can convince him of North of Citgo.

Here's a message for you from Mr. Deets, from August (10min):



He first reads a statement endorsing CIT's research and then, at around 4:30, Ranke asks him some questions. He first describes what he did at NASA, corrects the director thingy (research director, aeronautical engineer, research into experimental aircrafts and new technologies - the internet says he was involved in developing plane remote control systems, 37 years at NASA), and goes on to elaborate on his views about the Pentagon incident.

According to him, the official flight path (and data) does not only contradict the eyewitness testimonies but is also aeronautically impossible. This is diametrically opposed to the opinions of our resident NASA expert, who insists that the eyewitness testimony is meaningless and sees no problem at all with the flight path and/or data.

LashL, call Ron, i want to see the Deets/Mackey Hardfire Pentagon rocket scientist showdown!

 

[Disbelief]

If someone said a FEMA director, I'd assume there were more than one. That's how English works.

The strange thing about English is that it is very flexible. You can say Bill Clinton was a US president and be correct. The TM saying that Deets was a Director, notice past tense, can give the impression that he held a position greater than that of middle management.

Is Mackey lying when he says that Deets was not a NASA Director? A simple yes or no will do.

Still no.

 

[DGM]

Here's a message for you from Mr. Deets, from August (10min):



He first reads a statement endorsing CIT's research and then, at around 4:30, Ranke asks him some questions. He first describes what he did at NASA, corrects the director thingy (research director, aeronautical engineer, research into experimental aircrafts and new technologies - the internet says he was involved in developing plane remote control systems, 37 years at NASA), and goes on to elaborate on his views about the Pentagon incident.

According to him, the official flight path (and data) does not only contradict the eyewitness testimonies but is also aeronautically impossible. This is diametrically opposed to the opinions of our resident NASA expert, who insists that the eyewitness testimony is meaningless and sees no problem at all with the flight path and/or data.

LashL, call Ron, i want to see the Deets/Mackey Hardfire Pentagon rocket scientist showdown!

And this contradicts the physical evidence?


Never mind, I lost my head and forgot, that was all fake and everyone that collected it was "in on it".


Sorry, carry on.

 

[TexasJack]

Well, there you go, right from the horse's mouth. He states he was an aeronautical engineer for 37 years. Did anyone hear him say director? Red, how about you, since you have gone to great lengths to discredit Mackey, is it possible Mackey was right after all?

 

[thecritta]

911 truth protector, red ibis, needs to call NASA and see if they know why Deets makes up lies and spreads them. Did they retire him because he went nuts?

And what exactly is it that he is lying about may i ask?

 

[RedIbis]

Here is the quote I am referring to, from the linked article on page 4 of this thread.



Now that quote does not say a NASA director. It says "The retired NASA director".

However, for those who took the time, and can follow, it does explain later what he was director of.

TO be honest, I believe R.Mackey above a single news media report ANY DAY OF THE WEEK. If he says the report is a lie, then I believe him.

TAM

Edit: It would be interesting to see what Shane Cohn's source for Mr. Deets formerly held position is. I wonder if his source is not Deets himself. I wonder if Mr. Cohn verified that Deets held the position he states...I'm just asking questions.

I don't care what you quote you're referring to, NASA's own press release has been linked here several times.

Jeebus Christmas, are you so partisan that you can't admit Mackey made a mistake? And that would be putting it politely.

 

[R.Mackey]

Wait, wait -- Mr. Deets, Savior of the Truth Movement, has cast his lot with Craig and Waldo???

Seems to me he's doing a pretty darn good job of self destructing all by himself. He certainly doesn't need my help.

Incidentally, Craig's little video in the title card refers to him as a "NASA Flight Director," which he also was not. A Flight Director is the individual with ultimate responsibility over a space mission, e.g. Apollo 11 or STS-125. Note that Mr. Deets did not refer to himself as such; this idiocy was an invention of some other Truther.

So we have an ex-NASA manager who believes in CIT fantasies. So what? We already have a Truther ex-Physics professor who believes equally stupid things, including that the Haiti earthquake was man-made. This shouldn't be treated any differently.

People believe crazy things. Doesn't make them right, or even interesting.

 

[beachnut]

Here's a message for you from Mr. Deets, from August (10min):



He first reads a statement endorsing CIT's research and then, at around 4:30, Ranke asks him some questions. He first describes what he did at NASA, corrects the director thingy (research director, aeronautical engineer, research into experimental aircrafts and new technologies - the internet says he was involved in developing plane remote control systems, 37 years at NASA), and goes on to elaborate on his views about the Pentagon incident.

According to him, the official flight path (and data) does not only contradict the eyewitness testimonies but is also aeronautically impossible. This is diametrically opposed to the opinions of our resident NASA expert, who insists that the eyewitness testimony is meaningless and sees no problem at all with the flight path and/or data.

LashL, call Ron, i want to see the Deets/Mackey Hardfire Pentagon rocket scientist showdown!

On 911 issues, Deets is full blown nuts. CIT morons have Deets, another moron to spew their idiotic ideas. CIT and Deets, pushing the dumbest delusions in 911 truth.

 

[beachnut]

And what exactly is it that he is lying about may i ask?

What did he get right about 911? He says Flight 175 can't go 590 mph. He is wrong, so he is telling lies. A moron on this issue. Then we get a video by CIT and Deets proves he is mentally ill.

If you can think critically, you don't endorse the lies of CIT, the idiotic north flight path. Deets lost it.

 

[T.A.M.]

Wait, wait -- Mr. Deets, Savior of the Truth Movement, has cast his lot with Craig and Waldo???

Seems to me he's doing a pretty darn good job of self destructing all by himself. He certainly doesn't need my help.

Incidentally, Craig's little video in the title card refers to him as a "NASA Flight Director," which he also was not. A Flight Director is the individual with ultimate responsibility over a space mission, e.g. Apollo 11 or STS-125. Note that Mr. Deets did not refer to himself as such; this idiocy was an invention of some other Truther.

So we have an ex-NASA manager who believes in CIT fantasies. So what? We already have a Truther ex-Physics professor who believes equally stupid things, including that the Haiti earthquake was man-made. This shouldn't be treated any differently.

People believe crazy things. Doesn't make them right, or even interesting.

Ryan,

Did the NASA press release get it wrong, completely, or is there room here where he could be a "director" of something in NASA, and yet not be what you consider to be a "director"?

I am just curious, because it does seem odd that an institution as well respected and I think meticulous as NASA, would get something so obviously wrong, wrong.

Thanks

TAM

 

[R.Mackey]

Did the NASA press release get it wrong, completely, or is there room here where he could be a "director" of something in NASA, and yet not be what you consider to be a "director"?

I am just curious, because it does seem odd that an institution as well respected and I think meticulous as NASA, would get something so obviously wrong, wrong.

I've never heard anyone call NASA "meticulous" before... particularly our public relations office.

If you're referring to this, it says "Director, Aerospace Projects Office." If you quote-mine that and exclude everything after the comma, you get into trouble. The correct term of art for that post is a Program Manager, probably a Manager III position. Nobody within NASA would refer to this individual as "Director," as that would not be his job title. Just a description of a particular duty.

As I indicated before, the only people referred to as "Directors" are the Center Directors. For them, "Director" is their offical job title.

 

[T.A.M.]

SO what you are saying, is that for those who work at NASA, this fellow would never be known as, or referred to as, a DIRECTOR, but technically the word could be used as a description of part of his job responsibilities.

So was the person(s) who produced the NASA press release embelishing, or misusing the term?

TAM

 

[R.Mackey]

I have no idea how that press release came to be.

The point is that one's title and what one is doing at any particular instant are not the same thing. To use a related example, at JPL every space mission has a Chief Scientist, but those folks are not Chief Scientists. Typically those duties are fulfilled by someone with the job title of Principal Scientist. If they called themselves "Chief Scientists," they would be wrong, because JPL has a post called Chief Scientist and it isn't them. Just like NASA Dryden has a Director, and that post has never been filled by Mr. Deets.

I note, again, that Mr. Deets as far as I know has not referred to himself as a NASA Director. Only third parties have done so. There's a reason for this.

 

[Childlike Empress]

Well Mackey, to note it again, in the same post where you called the press release a lie, you also had this to say:

Mr. Deets was a semi-technical middle manager.

and this:

Mr. Deets is a nitwit. I say that with the full weight of evidence behind me.

The full weight of evidence included the press release you were commenting on, which contains beside other already quoted parts this:

In 1986 Deets received the American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics (AIAA) Wright Brothers Lectureship in Aeronautics Award. Among his other awards are the NASA Exceptional Service Award, presented in 1988. He was included in "Who's Who in America" for 1990-91 and "Who's Who in Science and Engineering" from 1993 to the present.

 

[ozeco41]

The "Captain" of a navy ship could well be a Commander or Lt Commander. It would be a fairly big ship where the person who was Captain of the ship held the rank of Captain.

(AFAIK that applies equally to USN as to RN and RAN/RNZN - except "big ship" means a lot more vessel in the USN )

 

[Sword_Of_Truth]

Of course not. You guys hate to admit when one of your own is flat out wrong, beyond wrong, simply lying, probably out of jealousy.

Have you backed up your claims that the firefighters were in on it or that Larry Silverstein "made out like a bandit"?

Or do you just hate to admit when you are wrong, beyond wrong or simply lying out of jealousy (or even religious bigotry)?

 

[RedIbis]

Ryan,

Did the NASA press release get it wrong, completely, or is there room here where he could be a "director" of something in NASA, and yet not be what you consider to be a "director"?

I am just curious, because it does seem odd that an institution as well respected and I think meticulous as NASA, would get something so obviously wrong, wrong.

Thanks

TAM

Maybe they didn't get anything wrong. Ever think of that? Not only does this NASA press release introduce him as a newly appointed Director, he was previously a Director, Research Engineering Division.

So if Mackey is right, the NASA press release has to be wrong at least twice.

I know you're partisan, TAM, but this is getting ridiculous. Your hero simply cannot bring himself to admit he's wrong.

 

[TexasJack]

Maybe they didn't get anything wrong. Ever think of that? Not only does this NASA press release introduce him as a newly appointed Director, he was previously a Director, Research Engineering Division.

So if Mackey is right, the NASA press release has to be wrong at least twice.

I know you're partisan, TAM, but this is getting ridiculous. Your hero simply cannot bring himself to admit he's wrong.

Then why in the video, when asked about his resume at NASA, didn't he mention that he was a director? All is he said was he was an aeronautical engineer. Don't you think he would have mentioned it?