NASA Engineer (ret.) is a Twoofie?

[Sword_Of_Truth]

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

Or... the word "director" has more than one meaning at NASA.

 

[Sword_Of_Truth]

Your hero simply cannot bring himself to admit he's wrong.

You mean like you with the FDNY and Larry Silverstein?

 

[RedIbis]

Or... the word "director" has more than one meaning at NASA.

True, he could be director of traffic flow in the parking lot, but the NASA press release says that "Deets has been appointed Director, Aerospace Projects Office at the NASA Dryden Flight Research Center" and previously was "Director, Research Engineering Division."

 

[Sword_Of_Truth]

True, he could be director of traffic flow in the parking lot, but the NASA press release says that "Deets has been appointed Director, Aerospace Projects Office at the NASA Dryden Flight Research Center" and previously was "Director, Research Engineering Division."

And according to a NASA engineer who posts here, those positions are middle-management flunkies at best.

 

[R.Mackey]

There's nothing wrong with being a program manager. I do a bit of program management myself in my current duties. But if you referred to me as "NASA Manager," or "NASA Principal Investigator," or what have you, I'd correct you. "NASA Engineer" or "NASA Scientist" would be appropriate terms. So would they be for Mr. Deets.

This really isn't that difficult. Were I unfamiliar with the Truth Movement, I would be astonished at the stupidity it takes to fail to grasp these simple concepts... but I am familiar with them, so I'm not.

It's no wonder, really. Even though it has no practical significance whatsoever, the semantic argument grows quite attractive when you don't have a snowball's chance in thermite of winning the technical argument.

 

[TexasJack]

Deets is a CIT advocate. I don't care where you worked or what your title is, that qualifies you as a loon.

 

[little grey rabbit]

Do I detect a hint of betrayal here?

 

[tsig]

Do I detect a hint of betrayal here?

No, that's semantic stew you're smelling.

 

[thecritta]

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.

Why dont you prove the flight 175 can go 590mph you cant prove he
is a liar until you debunk the 911 speed theory.

 

[T.A.M.]

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.

Mackey works for NASA, and I trust his explanation of how things really work in NASA, compared to a public relations press release.

I am partisan because Mackey I have never seen lie or bs. He has always called it like he sees it. I can't say that about truthers. I suspect in the end, it is a technicality, but Mackey has a point. Get Deets to comment on the description/title, and see if he calls it correct.

TAM

 

[T.A.M.]

Deets is a CIT advocate. I don't care where you worked or what your title is, that qualifies you as a loon.

exactly. Look at Morgan Reynolds...worked in the Reagan Admin...political semi big wig...yet a Judy Wood loony toon. The truth movement has lots of examples of old guys and gals who have lost their marbles.

TAM

 

[RedIbis]

There's nothing wrong with being a program manager. I do a bit of program management myself in my current duties. But if you referred to me as "NASA Manager," or "NASA Principal Investigator," or what have you, I'd correct you. "NASA Engineer" or "NASA Scientist" would be appropriate terms. So would they be for Mr. Deets.

This really isn't that difficult. Were I unfamiliar with the Truth Movement, I would be astonished at the stupidity it takes to fail to grasp these simple concepts... but I am familiar with them, so I'm not.

It's no wonder, really. Even though it has no practical significance whatsoever, the semantic argument grows quite attractive when you don't have a snowball's chance in thermite of winning the technical argument.

It's not a semantic argument. It's you vs. a NASA press release. Has NASA ever retracted their press release?

 

[The Big Dog]

It's not a semantic argument. It's you vs. a NASA press release. Has NASA ever retracted their press release?

Great point, Red Ibis, they have NOT "retracted their press release."

That can mean but one thing: INSIDE JOBBY JOB!

/well "great point" in the sense of being a completely and utterly pointless post in a thread that is a screaming fallacy.

 

[beachnut]

Why dont you prove the flight 175 can go 590mph you cant prove he is a liar until you debunk the 911 speed theory.

Already did! Took video, divided time in to distance got ~590 mph, Deets is going with 510 KIAS.
He is a liar saying Flight 175 can't go 510 KIAS, because Flight 175 is on video doing 510 KIAS. OOPS!

Why can't you do math or research?

To help poor Deets, you need to prove a plane can't go 580 mph in a dive with engines full blast! I know it is possible, I flew heavy jets, and they can go MACH 1 in a dive with engine at Full Throttle. Questions? I have flow over Vmo! I have flown at .9 MACH for hours, some of you have flown close to .9 MACH when your pilot is trying to make up time! The newer Jets have big fan engines, doubt you have been over .86 MACH with big fans, but I had tiny turbos and they were flight tested to .95 MACH, if you can read the owners manual closely (Dash-1). Sorry you newest expert has gone nuts and is an idiot on 911 issues.

The video taken on 911 shows Flight 175 impacting the WTC tower at about 590 mph. The RADAR data confirms this is Flight 175. Case closed, Deets is a liar who can't do rational research, he waves his hands and lies. You like lies from Deets? Why can't you take the video of Flight 175 and do like I did and get a rough speed estimate. We know the length of the airframe, and with the video you can take the time it hits, to the time the tail enters the WTC, and you have the speed estimate, proving Deets is wrong. I did it, and all it take is a grade school education; are you void of a grade school education? Length divided by time, GRADE SCHOOL. Here is a failed human, Deets, making up lies; Why?

Why can't you do math? Why don't you know you are being lied to?

Believe in Deets, he is wrong, you already have no idea what happen on 911 or any knowledge so your failure to figure out Deets is nuts is not a big surprise. Got math?

 

[dadeets]

NASA positions

I've been asked to explain my Director positions at NASA.

True, I was not a Center Director.

The line managers that directly report to the CD are called "Directors for." I was, prior to retirement, Director for Aerospace Projects.

NASA Dryden Flight Research Center is, and has been organized in a matrix management structure. The Aerospace Projects Office consists of the project managers of the various flight research projects. There were about twenty projects at any given time.

Prior to that position, I was the Director for Research Engineering. The Research Engineering Directorate represented a horizontal cut across the projects with all of the engineers assigned to the projects.

In earlier years, the directorates were called divisions, and the heads of the divisions were called chiefs. At that time, I was called the Chief of the Research Engineering Division.

The divisions were broken down into branches. Prior to becoming Research Engineering Division Chief, I was the Dynamics and Control Branch Chief. Dynamics and Control included Flight Controls, Structural Dynamics, and Flight Systems.

Dwain Deets

 

[R.Mackey]

Thanks for clearing that up. It seemed pretty clear to me that it was other people, not yourself, confusing your title (e.g. the CIT boys's film calling you a "Flight Director").

 

[beachnut]

I've been asked to explain my Director positions at NASA.

True, I was not a Center Director.

The line managers that directly report to the CD are called "Directors for." I was, prior to retirement, Director for Aerospace Projects.

NASA Dryden Flight Research Center is, and has been organized in a matrix management structure. The Aerospace Projects Office consists of the project managers of the various flight research projects. There were about twenty projects at any given time.

Prior to that position, I was the Director for Research Engineering. The Research Engineering Directorate represented a horizontal cut across the projects with all of the engineers assigned to the projects.

In earlier years, the directorates were called divisions, and the heads of the divisions were called chiefs. At that time, I was called the Chief of the Research Engineering Division.

The divisions were broken down into branches. Prior to becoming Research Engineering Division Chief, I was the Dynamics and Control Branch Chief. Dynamics and Control included Flight Controls, Structural Dynamics, and Flight Systems.

Dwain Deets

Thanks,


Why can't a Boeing 767/757 fly faster than Vmo for 20 seconds?

 

[dadeets]

Thanks,

What is your excuse for making up lies about 911? I saw a CIT video of you spewing nonsense.

Why can't a Boeing 767/757 fly faster than Vmo for 20 seconds and impact the Pentagon, crash? Same for flight 175, proved by RADAR to be Flight 175 with real people on it, which I calculated was about 590 mph from video. Simple math, and simple RADAR data makes your lie of Flight 175 can't to rest. Evidence speaks, your talk of woo is nonsense.

A hit an run. You never did the work to check the speed of impact. You never looked up the fact RADAR shows Flight 175 impacted the WTC, the exact same time some who post here saw Flight 175 impact the WTC. Gee, witnesses and RADAR, and Video, and dead people you make up lies about! Wow, what do you do after you retire from NASA? You did not go to Disneyland, or maybe you did, but your mind seems to be in delusion-land on 911 issues.

is this typical of the depth of discussion here on JREF? Can tell someone tell me which of these several questions is the most important for me to answer?

 

[R.Mackey]

I'll handle this.

You've made the claim that AA 175 could not have impacted WTC 2 as advertised because its computed speed of ~ 560 MPH was unattainable at that altitude. (I'm paraphrasing; feel free to correct the details.) On what basis do you do so? Boeing 767's have exceeded this speed by a considerable margin at even lower altitudes on their way to crashes.

 

[beachnut]

is this typical of the depth of discussion here on JREF? Can tell someone tell me which of these several questions is the most important for me to answer?

I will wait... lol, you worked with CIT and you are worried about depth of discussion? wow