NASA Engineer (ret.) is a Twoofie?

[Childlike Empress]

Hey CE, how ya doing on Frank Probst?

http://fire.nist.gov/bfrlpubs/build03/PDF/b03017.pdf

Pages 12-13. I wonder if Mr. Deets saw this before he jumped in on behalf of Justin Ranke and the Buffet Slayer.

I told you that i'd comment on him - preferable in a thread more appropriate - after you have acknowledged that "Arabesque"'s list is at best misleading, as shown by Stefan. Instead you continue to claim that the witnesses contained in that disingenious piece do contradict the NoC witnesses, which they don't. So, after you.

@TAM: You are not the only one who wants to see that happen. Red and I made proposals too. But remember, the three of us aren't rocket scientists. If Mackey doesn't agree to a moderated thread, it won't happen.

 

[T.A.M.]

I told you that i'd comment on him - preferable in a thread more appropriate - after you have acknowledged that "Arabesque"'s list is at best misleading, as shown by Stefan. Instead you continue to claim that the witnesses contained in that disingenious piece do contradict the NoC witnesses, which they don't. So, after you.

@TAM: You are not the only one who wants to see that happen. Red and I made proposals too. But remember, the three of us aren't rocket scientists. If Mackey doesn't agree to a moderated thread, it won't happen.

Well perhaps (I only suggest) that A thread be created by one of them, where both their questions (they each had one of the others) are posted, and each then provide comprehensive answers (and rebuttals after) to each.

There is nothing more any of us can do.

TAM

 

[Childlike Empress]

There is nothing more any of us can do.

I agree. *marks the day red in the calender*

 

[Disbelief]

Why would he? Just take a look at the level of discussion thus far. He has no obligation to jref. He was friendly enough to clear up Mackey's misrepresentation of his career at NASA.

How did Mackey misrepresent him? He appears to be a semi-technical midlevel manager and nothing Mr. Deets has posted disproves that. Please show where Mackey misrepresented his career.

 

[T.A.M.]

For those interested a bit more in Mr. Deets 9/11 beliefs, you might find his new website a little revealing...

http://www.7problemswithbuilding7.info/

TAM

 

[T.A.M.]

On this webforum, apparently run by Jeff Hill (Shure), there is a recorded interview with Mr. Deets and Jeff.

http://s1.zetaboards.com/pumpitout/topic/3611382/1/

TAM

 

[Miragememories]

The offer was made for him to start up a moderated thread where only he and Mackey would discuss things....he has not created that thread. Should we have to do that for him?

TAM

My impression was that the last thing Mackey wants is a discussion, moderated or otherwise.

If such a desire was truly the case, I don't think he would have made such unsolicited comments as these in this thread;

"Mr. Deets, Savior of the Truth Movement"

Dwain Deets has been mentioned here, well over a year ago. I haven't seen anything from him that's any different than the same Truther garbage we've debunked a hundred times.
Nobody's brought anything new. So, why bother?

Ron Wieck called me today and suggested I should talk to, or perhaps debate, Mr. Deets. But I really do not see the point.

It doesn't matter what he was or who he was, all that matters is the accuracy and verifiability of what he says. He fails completely in both respects.

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

So we have an ex-NASA manager who believes in CIT fantasies.

The semantic argument grows quite attractive when you don't have a snowball's chance in thermite
of winning the technical argument."

Mr. Deets makes his appearance in the thread and Mackey throws out his first question.

"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."

"I presume you are including the conversion to equivalent airspeed in your statement. Please provide examples"

Then, after having some time to read back through the thread and gauge the level of respect he can expect from openly participating in a discussion.

"I don't have time to respond to all these minithreads at the same time. Plus, the degree of scorn lacing the posts is up a notch or two from other "unfriendly" forums I've engaged with previously."

Does Mackey attempt to answer the civil request Mr. Deets made to him, asking for clarification and an illustrative example re:Mackey's question?

No. Apparently, that was demanding too much respect...or something?

"Typical. They never back up their claims."

"I believe he's waiting for you to reply to his question about speed conversion."

"If he is, it's complete BS. He can use any units he wants. MPH,
KCAS, KPH, furlongs per fortnight, I don't care. I invited him to clarify his claim in my original question.
Maybe Truthers are stupid enough to live with this excuse, but I'm not."

So, like I said; my impression is that the last thing Mackey wants is a discussion, moderated or otherwise.

MM

 

[T.A.M.]

Impressions or not, the offer was made, and as well, I clarified that in the past, when a request has been made for a moderated thread where only two are involved in a debate or discussion, such requests have been honored...completely.

TAM

 

[RedIbis]

My impression was that the last thing Mackey wants is a discussion, moderated or otherwise.

If such a desire was truly the case, I don't think he would have made such unsolicited comments as these in this thread;



Mr. Deets makes his appearance in the thread an Mackey throws out his first question.





Then, after having some time to read back through the thread and gauge the level of respect he can expect from openly participating in a discussion.



Does Mackey attempt to answer the civil request Mr. Deets made to him, asking for clarification and an illustrative example re:Mackey's question?

No. Apparently, that was demanding too much respect...or something?







So, like I said; my impression is that the last thing Mackey wants is a discussion, moderated or otherwise.

MM

I am truly endebted. You just saved me an hour of having to re read through this crap to see if Mackey ever did provide any examples.

 

[The Big Dog]

I told you that i'd comment on him - preferable in a thread more appropriate - after you have acknowledged that "Arabesque"'s list is at best misleading, as shown by Stefan. Instead you continue to claim that the witnesses contained in that disingenious piece do contradict the NoC witnesses, which they don't. So, after you.

@TAM: You are not the only one who wants to see that happen. Red and I made proposals too. But remember, the three of us aren't rocket scientists. If Mackey doesn't agree to a moderated thread, it won't happen.

Snicker.

You mean you won't talk about Probst based on a web site that completely ignores him?

GENIUS!

 

[Childlike Empress]

My post #499, quoted by beachnut so Mackey could read it despite having me "on ignore":

To recap: Mr. Deets expressed his general willingness to discuss a 9/11 topic with you in a moderated thread. I and others proposed topics, but as long as you are not willing to take it up, all proposals are moot. And you were silent so far.

We saw that Ron has tried to persuate you to do a Hardfire show with Balsamo since at least early 2009. Now that Deets showed up, your excuse that Balsamo isn't qualified (unlike Tony Szamboti) to take it up with the big NASA scientist that you are is invalid. As i saw when i read the first pages of this thread, Ron asked you again to take it up with Deets.

So wassup? Hardfire? Moderated thread? Or "nothing to debate"?

 

[beachnut]

Why would he? Just take a look at the level of discussion thus far. He has no obligation to jref. He was friendly enough to clear up Mackey's misrepresentation of his career at NASA.

Why would Deets discuss his delusions of a flyover based on no evidence here? You got a point!

Level of discussion? He has the moronic lie of a fly over by Flight 77; the plane and passengers were found at the Pentagon. Witnesses, RADAR, DNA, and the FDR verify the event. What level of discussion do moronic lies merit?

Friendly like a snake-oil salesman! Mackey was right about his career at NASA.

 

[Miragememories]

I know it's really surprising that he would come to the conclusion that jref is not exactly the place for sincere, civil discourse. Just look at the last few comments for confirmation.

Ya go figure.

Too funny.

MM

 

[excaza]

If he was really so concerned, he would publish his findings instead of leaving them for conspiracy theorists to wing about on obscure internet forums that have zero bearing on the real world.

 

[beachnut]

...

Mr. Deets makes his appearance in the thread an Mackey throws out his first question.
...

Does Mackey attempt to answer the civil request Mr. Deets made to him, asking for clarification and an illustrative example re:Mackey's question?

...MM

"I presume you are including the conversion to equivalent airspeed in your statement. Please provide examples"

MM, Deets was dodging the question. He was acting like a dolt, one who is too smart to talk about his delusions.

Both Mackey and I asked Deets to use any airspeed he wants since the conditions, near sea level etc. are known, who cares what speed he uses as long as he supports his claims with evidence, sources, etc.

You are making up lies.

We answered, Deets ignored, and you were fooled by his dodge.

ice-t, Deets were are you?

 

[pgimeno]

Here is a good chunk of Flt 800 's 140 tons retrieved from the bottom of long island sound and shown here reconstructed during a NTSB investigation.

[qimg]http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/imagehosting/thum_363814ca0222224caf.jpg[/qimg]

Got a picture of any of flt 77 's 140 tons used
to reconstruct a Boeing 757 for an NTSB investigation Al ? No ?

Have you read the NTSB crash report on AA77?

Hint 1: http://www.ntsb.gov/ntsb/query.asp

Hint 2: NTSB knew this plane did not suffer a malfunction or human error which had to be investigated in order to prevent the situation in future.

Hint 3: This plane crashed at about the same speed as AA77, except it had far less mass. Try to imagine the size of the pieces. https://share.sandia.gov/news/resources/video-gallery/index.html#rocketsled. (Who said phantoms can go through walls?)

 

[Miragememories]

MM, Deets was dodging the question. He was acting like a dolt, one who is too smart to talk about his delusions.

Both Mackey and I asked Deets to use any airspeed he wants since the conditions, near sea level etc. are known, who cares what speed he uses as long as he supports his claims with evidence, sources, etc.

You are making up lies.

We answered, Deets ignored, and you were fooled by his dodge.

ice-t, Deets were are you?

I quoted the truth.

Suck it up.

MM

 

[BigAl]

I quoted the truth.

Suck it up.

MM

You've posted nothing that shows how 140 tons of aircraft and the identified bodily remains of all 64 people that boarded it was found inside the Pentagon 90 minutes aafter taking off from Dulles airport. The approach, the crash and the forensic recovery was under continuous observation by countless people. We know the names and have the statements of about 250.

 

[funk de fino]

Ya go figure.

Too funny.

MM

MM

How were the ATC guys duped into seeing the radar track dissappear at the Pentagon? How did the military do that?

 

[Disbelief]

You've posted nothing that shows how 140 tons of aircraft and the identified bodily remains of all 64 people that boarded it was found inside the Pentagon 90 minutes aafter taking off from Dulles airport. The approach, the crash and the forensic recovery was under continuous observation by countless people. We know the names and have the statements of about 250.

You might as well ask him to prove that freefall is planned for in CDs. Neither is going to happen anytime soon.