1,600 verified architectural and engineering professionals

little grey rabbit said:
......Just a bit of the same old hoaxing from the usual suspects. Not interesting, not talented, not even particular wicked really; merely boring, unimaginative and somewhat pathetic.
Click to expand...

Thank you for summarizing your time here and the twoof movement in one sentenence, I couldn't agree more.
 
Animal said:
Crap..I should have gone there....I was required to take (3) 5 hour calculus classes (diffy Q's killed me) (3) 4 hour physics classes (quantum physics killed me too) (3) 5 hour building structures classes (wood, steel, concrete) and that was after classes in statics and dynamics. The "art" classes were limited to (3) 3 hour classes. The design studio was (12) 5 hours classes. [We were on the quarter system]
Click to expand...

The two AZ schools have their architecture as part of the art and design school, and it shows ... those who want to do more than draw pretty pictures usually get a second degree from the Engineering department or at least take enough Eng courses as a minor to build things that won't fall down.
 
Grizzly Bear said:
In short, Marrokan is attempting to make an insignificant number more important than it really is, when the numbers are not backed by any science.


By majority, I'm referring to marrokan's reference to "1,600 architects and engineers" being a tiny fraction of one percent of just the architect population in one country on the planet, with absolutely no factual, or otherwise incriminating materials backing their claims. In comparison, we have 105,000 US architects (2010 figure) whom have approved over the last several years changes to the building codes internationally as a result of NISTS findings, and protests against them thus far have had nothing to do with the validity of the actual collapse hypothesis. Given the scope of reach that building codes have on the architecture and engineering professions, if the changes were based on faulty findings in the NIST report, then 105,000+ professionals would not remain silent.

Marokkan and yourself raise 1,600 professions of different disciplines to a pedestal equivalent to a religion's God in omnipotence. Rather than have a discussion about the claims merits, you and he would rather measure things with numbers, which trivially you still lose at, and the reasons for which are backed imperially through commitments to the international building codes which provide a far better litmus test of the professional environment than petitions which set out to accomplish nothing.


You want to show me influence? Get the off the numbers and show me results. What have your 1,600 architects done to demonstrate that they're even remotely competent? Screw calling them fakes, they're sporting theories as professionals. Knowingly distorting the experience in one's profession and the concepts involved is worse than being fakes any day of the week.


Again, when I see someone plastering numbers to make an appeal to popularity, I expect good information to back that up. Have your 1600 experts tried protesting the code changes for example? Absolutely not. Their evidence doesn't even stand up to the scrutiny that would prove them to be competent, let alone be able to show the changes to be based on a false hypothesis. Sorry if I sound like an ass, but I have no sympathy anymore for incompetents,much less for those who parrot them.

They made up a petition and they sell products on a website. Beyond a few faux lectures, they done very little to advance any sense of "justice." In short they've done nothing... I call it as I see it
Click to expand...

Couldn't have said it better myself.
 
ergo said:
Whereas your credentials in design and engineering are....?
Click to expand...
Entirely irrelevant, ergo, unless he's actually making a claim that would require them. But nice job, trying to end-run around acknowledging the credentials already presented, to make it personal, as you do.

ergo said:
Yes, I'm pretty sure he doesn't actually have any, so I'm just a little confused as to what kind of comment he thinks he's making here, and on what basis he's making it.
Click to expand...
Like that time you claimed one couldn't tell the time using the Sun's position and information from the US Naval observatory? I recall being quite confused at the time.
 
Grizzly Bear said:
Given the scope of reach that building codes have on the architecture and engineering professions, if the changes were based on faulty findings in the NIST report, then 105,000+ professionals would not remain silent.
Click to expand...

Falling Free said:
"The judgment of the map was falsified in these electronic dream images. But the universal laws of physics yielded a judgment of blood that was absolutely real. Eighty-six people died altogether. That," Leo pointed again, "was not merely fraud, it was coldest, crudest murder."

He gathered his breath. "This is the most important thing I will ever say to you. The human mind is the ultimate testing device. You can take all the notes you want on the technical data, anything you forget you can look up again, but this must be engraved on your hearts in letters of fire.

"There is nothing, nothing, nothing more important to me in the men and women I train than their absolute personal integrity. Whether you function as welders or inspectors, the laws of physics are implacable lie-detectors. You may fool men. You will never fool the metal. That's all."
Click to expand...

http://baencd.thefifthimperium.com/...iles, Mutants and Microbes/1416521410___3.htm
 
little grey rabbit said:
Right and I suppose a key assessment criteria is watching a video and saying whether a progressive collapse was caused by a fire or purpose placed explosives.
Click to expand...
No, troll, they generally go out into the field and look at physical evidence, compare as much as they can to similar events, etc. Which meant they actually investigate than most of the signatories, who usually do just judge via Youtube.
 
Grizzly Bear said:
In short, Marrokan is attempting to make an insignificant number more important than it really is, when the numbers are not backed by any science.


By majority, I'm referring to marrokan's reference to "1,600 architects and engineers" being a tiny fraction of one percent of just the architect population in one country on the planet, with absolutely no factual, or otherwise incriminating materials backing their claims. In comparison, we have 105,000 US architects (2010 figure) whom have approved over the last several years changes to the building codes internationally as a result of NISTS findings, and protests against them thus far have had nothing to do with the validity of the actual collapse hypothesis. Given the scope of reach that building codes have on the architecture and engineering professions, if the changes were based on faulty findings in the NIST report, then 105,000+ professionals would not remain silent.



Marokkan and yourself raise 1,600 professions of different disciplines to a pedestal equivalent to a religion's God in omnipotence. Rather than have a discussion about the claims merits, you and he would rather measure things with numbers, which trivially you still lose at, and the reasons for which are backed imperially through commitments to the international building codes which provide a far better litmus test of the professional environment than petitions which set out to accomplish nothing.


You want to show me influence? Get the off the numbers and show me results. What have your 1,600 architects done to demonstrate that they're even remotely competent? Screw calling them fakes, they're sporting theories as professionals. Knowingly distorting the experience in one's profession and the concepts involved is worse than being fakes any day of the week.


Again, when I see someone plastering numbers to make an appeal to popularity, I expect good information to back that up. Have your 1600 experts tried protesting the code changes for example? Absolutely not. Their evidence doesn't even stand up to the scrutiny that would prove them to be competent, let alone be able to show the changes to be based on a false hypothesis. Sorry if I sound like an ass, but I have no sympathy anymore for incompetents,much less for those who parrot them.

They made up a petition and they sell products on a website. Beyond a few faux lectures, they done very little to advance any sense of "justice." In short they've done nothing... I call it as I see it
Click to expand...

At the very least you are guilty of the very same thing. Your first reply was with numbers, and trying to make a point that there are many who haven't signed the petition. I can say the same thing to you "when I see someone plastering numbers to make an appeal to popularity, I expect good information to back that up" But not only are the numbers not good they are non-existent as NIST won't even release them.

What this is all really about is you being upset about that mistake you made, about the petition for the official story. You writing a lot of stuff trying to save face as best you can. I could have been much more harsh in my reply to that. You had such confirmation bias you didn't even read what I wrote closely, and just assumed I was adding support to a CT. In short what you did is exactly what you are accusing me of doing. You started out saying that the 1600 that are against the official story are not a big deal in comparison to the total number. I pointed out evidence contrary to it and only now you want to talk about the claims each side has made. It was fine to talk about numbers until I brought that up though right?
 
Hey, TMD, maybe you can answer: 1600 people signed a petition......so what?
 
000063 said:
Like that time you claimed one couldn't tell the time using the Sun's position and information from the US Naval observatory? I recall being quite confused at the time.
Click to expand...

Yes, I'm sure I said that. I'm sure your memory and comprehension of things I say is laser sharp. I think it was even in this thread where I said that, right? Why don't you find the post for us?
 
It took 5 years, for some conman, to get 1600 'people' to sign a list on the internet.

And this is impressive how?
 
tmd2_1 said:
At the very least you are guilty of the very same thing. Your first reply was with numbers, and trying to make a point that there are many who haven't signed the petition. I can say the same thing to you "when I see someone plastering numbers to make an appeal to popularity, I expect good information to back that up" But not only are the numbers not good they are non-existent as NIST won't even release them.
Click to expand...

Right, so lets ignore the 1600 idiots on your side and the 3,500,000+ engineers on ours and just look at the hard science.

The number of peer reviewed papers supporting the conspiracist view of 9/11: 0

Zip.

Zilch.

Goose egg.

1600 people who refuse to submit an actual theory or hypothesis for consideration by the scientific or technical community means nothing. As Einstein himself once said in response to another petition being circulated against his work "If I really am wrong, they only need one person to show it".

Peer reviewed science or STFU.
 
You know.... I understand that it's lazy to just copy and paste stuff from the past. But at the same time, it's pertinent. If conspiracy peddlers are giong to keep on trying to raise this appeal to authority, this is how I'm going to respond:
ElMondoHummus said:
Before I start, I need to make this clear that this isn't a criticism of RKOwens4's post. He makes a good point about the validity of the engineering expertise that the AE911T group claims to have, and I agree with that point. Their credentials are indeed overstated.

But, that said, to me it doesn't matter how many engineers they have. The acid test has always been the claim itself, not the authorities behind one stance or another. That is the essence of objective analysis: "Does the claim stand or fall on its own merits?". By itself, the number of people making a claim does not impress me when the number is cited by itself without corresponding arguments for why the number matters. I'm impressed when I learn that a majority of scientists support one hypothesis over another when I also understand the rationale behind their support, and the logic they apply to come to a conclusion (the Cold Fusion issue is a good example of this). I am not impressed with a number alone, and I am most certainly not impressed when I discover that the individual motivations behind support for a thesis are revealed to be either based on misunderstandings and misrepresentations, or just plain flawed. And that's the case with the AE911T list. When you read through the reasons the members give for joining, you see nothing but the canards and mistakes that have been shown to be wrong over and over here and in other forums. You don't see any original thinking, and you most certainly do not see any attempt to modify stances based on developing knowledge. How many people continue to stand behind the thermite fantasy despite the utter lack of characteristic effects, let alone the absolute misrepresentation of information that Steven Jones commits?

Knowledge develops, and when it does, hypotheses must develop as well. You see very little of this in the so-called truth movement. Credit Steven Jones for at least trying to follow along that line, but criticize others for failing to do so. And include the AE911T group in that.

Anyway, the point is that the individual rationales for people joining that list are flawed; that much is obvious by reading the rationales provided. They continually cite disproven issues as being the driving force for them joining. So to me, it doesn't matter if the individual adding him/herself to the list is a software engineer, or is credentialed in fire safety for large structures, the point is that the belief itself is wrong regardless of the credentials held by the person stating it. Einstein himself would be wrong if he stated something that violates physical laws, nevermind his expertise in physics. His credentials don't matter. And neither do the ones held by the members of AE911T. I'm not impressed by the members individual reasons for joining that group, I'm not impressed by the "scholarship" the organization produces, and I'm most certainly not impressed by the conspiracy peddlers continual use of that group as a lazy appeal to authority. The problem has always been and will always be the details of the truther argument itself. And until the flaws are solved, it doesn't matter who says they believe in it. So in the end, it doesn't matter what their claimed expertise is, or what the number of "real" engineers is in that organization. What matters is their stance, and the utter separation from reality it has.
Click to expand...
It's the same response from 2008, and like the fantasist claim, it hasn't changed since then. It hasn't changed because it hasn't needed to. That's how lazy the truther stance is. And so in turn, this response is all an OP like the one for this thread warrants.
 
tmd2_1 said:
At the very least you are guilty of the very same thing. Your first reply was with numbers, and trying to make a point that there are many who haven't signed the petition.
Click to expand...

Yes, and I highlight it because it's humiliating to 911 truth to lose even to that pathetic game. Reality is beyond putting names on an Internet humiliation bill board they've made no headway. Hey, I'm sorry you have a problem with that, but reality is harsh for you. As it is for all of 911 truth




I can say the same thing to you[\quote]

Done already. Building codes have already been revised. Your experts have made no effort to protest the conclusions in part where they would matter the
Most. Further, no competent professional would knowingly make mistakes such as equating a skyscraper to a cardboard box
Click to expand...
 
Sword_Of_Truth said:
Right, so lets ignore the 1600 idiots on your side and the 3,500,000+ engineers on ours and just look at the hard science.

The number of peer reviewed papers supporting the conspiracist view of 9/11: 0

Zip.

Zilch.

Goose egg.

1600 people who refuse to submit an actual theory or hypothesis for consideration by the scientific or technical community means nothing. As Einstein himself once said in response to another petition being circulated against his work "If I really am wrong, they only need one person to show it".

Peer reviewed science or STFU.
Click to expand...

Uhhh its NIST that does not have peer reviewed article, why are you contradicting yourselve?
 
Marokkaan said:
Im still wondering if there is a majority who defends the official conspiracy theory.

Does somebody have the numbers?
Click to expand...

You mean is the number of actual architects and structural engineers who don't support 9/11 Twoof larger than the number of landscapers and log cabin designers who signed the AET911 petition?

Whoever said there's no such thing as a stupid question obviously hadn't met AET911 fanboys.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom