• 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.

The sad case of Niels Harrit

bill smith said:
It would be difficult to trust any major lab. especially an American one without special conditions like the whole thing being filmed and some Truth scientists sitting in and verifying every step. Wouldn't you agree ?

Then NIST could provide a sample. So could RJ Lee. They could all be tested simultaneously.
Click to expand...


Send them out under a pseudonym saying the dust was found after a fire and could you tell us what it is. Most of the world doesn't know that twoofers exist or cares.
 
bill smith said:
It would be difficult to trust any major lab. especially an American one without special conditions like the whole thing being filmed and some Truth scientists sitting in and verifying every step. Wouldn't you agree ?
Click to expand...

I do not agree! The details to all experiments will be recorded. This is the given procedure in every lab (not only in major labs). If you doubt the results of the experiments refer to these protocols. You will find every detail you need there.
 
bill smith said:
It would be difficult to trust any major lab. especially an American one without special conditions like the whole thing being filmed and some Truth scientists sitting in and verifying every step. Wouldn't you agree ?
Click to expand...
:jaw-dropp

Wow, that's paranoia for you. Also shows that you don't know how these things work. Just send the damn things anonymously. I'm constantly surprised at the inner workings of the truther mind.
 
Sunstealer said:
:jaw-dropp

Wow, that's paranoia for you. Also shows that you don't know how these things work. Just send the damn things anonymously. I'm constantly surprised at the inner workings of the truther mind.
Click to expand...

If it was done anonymously I doubt that the results would be widely accepted. If the samples were sent to an American or any major lab the tests might be faked due to goverment influence so again the results would not be accepted.

The way that would gain the most acceptance is probably the one I outlined.
 
Last edited:
bill smith said:
If it was done anonymously I doubt that the results would be widely accepted. If the samples were sent to an American or any maojor lab the tests might be faked due to goverment influence so again the results would not be accepted.

The way that would gain the most acceptance is the one I outlined.
Click to expand...
"Acceptance" by who?
 
DGM said:
You didn't answer my original question. Who decides who the "truth" person is? Any suggestions?
Click to expand...

More than one Truth scientist. Harrit for his eminent and relevent qualifications, probably Jones for his experience and one other to be decided.
 
bill smith said:
It would be difficult to trust any major lab. especially an American one without special conditions like the whole thing being filmed and some Truth scientists sitting in and verifying every step. Wouldn't you agree ?
Click to expand...

Rarely have you written something that I would agree with less. I do not agree at all. Not one bit.
 
Oystein said:
Yes. You intodruce bias as a design requirement.
Click to expand...

The other choice is to trust the labs blindly. Like we did with NIST. It's not going to happen.

Unless it's done something like the way I said. What's the problem anyway ?
 
DGM said:
Will you "trust blindly" that the sample provided was not tampered with?
Click to expand...

As I said samples from NIST.Jones and RJ Lee could be tested simultaneously. Theoretically they should all be the same.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom