Merged 9/11 No Plane/Energy Weapon discussion thread

[jammonius]

Did a student say: "Her tests are difficult"? If so, that might place much of the seeming criticism in proper perspective and, once again, CONTEXT.

Just as an aside, academia in its higher realms is about publishing, is it not. You know, "publish or perish."

Well, have you seen "WHERE DID THE TOWERS GO?"

Just sayin...

 

[jammonius]

No Jammy...there are no lurkers here that agree with you...it's all in your head. You can't answer my question because Dr. Judy doesn't answer it. You are dependent on her for your answers.

What's it like to depend on others for you answers?

I asked for lurkers who are capable DEBUNKERS, Mzcgyver. Sheesh, you are slipping, my friend. Come on...

 

[Macgyver1968]

Did a student say: "Her tests are difficult"? If so, that might place much of the seeming criticism in proper perspective and, once again, CONTEXT.

Just as an aside, academia in its higher realms is about publishing, is it not. You know, "publish or perish."

Well, have you seen "WHERE DID THE TOWERS GO?"

Just sayin...

So you completely ignored my response. I knew you would.

 

[Macgyver1968]

You asked for lurkers, because you were incapable of answering the questions of people like me. It was your way of trying to avoid questions you didn't have the answers to.

 

[jammonius]

Macgyver, I've already said "be patient." No offense, Macgyver, but I really would prefer dialogue with people who've read the book and can post up meaningful claims about it. Plus, I've given you a way forward. Let me add to that a little bit more. If you post something from the website that you take issue with, and do so in a way that makes a claim. I will refer to the book in reply if doing so would be in order.

Fair enough?

 

[Macgyver1968]

Jammy...I haven't read her book...but I have gone over ever aspect of her website. I doubt there is any difference.

Your unwillingness to answer basic questions shows that her theories are just fantasies in the mind of a delusional person.

 

[jammonius]

No Jammy...there are no lurkers here that agree with you...it's all in your head. You can't answer my question because Dr. Judy doesn't answer it. You are dependent on her for your answers.

What's it like to depend on others for you answers?

This replies to the claim of "dependen[ce] on [Judy Wood] for ... answers."

Just on the preceding page, I posted a quote from an independent source concerning hurricanes.

See: http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=8252156&postcount=408

Your claim is, therefore, inaccurate.

 

[Macgyver1968]

Then by all means...please explain what the rust on the bottom of this truck has to do with anything?

 

[jammonius]

Jammy...I haven't read her book...but I have gone over ever aspect of her website. I doubt there is any difference.

Your unwillingness to answer basic questions shows that her theories are just fantasies in the mind of a delusional person.

I seem to recall that you have shown familiarity with her website. But, your above quote is a broad-brush generality that does not facilitate a reply. Do you have a claim you'd like to make concerning an aspect of Dr. Wood's forensic determination that a form of DEW destroyed the WTC complex on 9/11, Macgyver?

If so, make your claim.

I'm not staying on much longer for just generalized chitter chatter.

 

[Macgyver1968]

In other words...you don't know...just say it.

 

[jammonius]

I've already opened up the topic of the electrical nature of tornadoes and hurricanes. Certainly, gravity and kerosene don't flip cars or selectively rust them out. Dr. Wood is merely showing that the effects seen at and around GZ are caused by exotic weaponry, Macgyver.

In contrast, NIST and/or 9/11 Commission did not explain what had happened, at all.

Perhaps your quarrel is more with the lack of explanation from any source OTHER than Dr. Wood, rather than with her explanation, demonstration, proof and painstaking forensic work.

 

[MIKILLINI]

I have already lamented the poor quality of debunking seen to be taking place here.

Are there any lurkers out there who can do better? Your help is desparately needed.

Come on,

DO BETTER

I've seen your pathetic arguments Jammy..You haven't done any better than before or discovered anything substantial since. Poor quality is the hallmark of your argument; That's all you have proved, nothing else.

You continue to ignore real evidence and pretend you haven't been proven wrong. Asking for "desperately needed help" fits your case perfectly: It's beyond life-support.

 

[MIKILLINI]

In other words...you don't know...just say it.

He won't say it..but he don't know it.

 

[Macgyver1968]

So there's no chance that a 8 year old truck would have rust on it? before it was flipped by tornadic winds?

What exotic weaponry can cause rust on frame rails and exhaust systems but not on body panels?

 

[CompusMentus]

Did a student say: "Her tests are difficult"? If so, that might place much of the seeming criticism in proper perspective and, once again, CONTEXT

Besides jammonius I'm sure the rest of us understand the "context" in which those quotes were made.

Once again, it seems jammonius has difficulty comprehending (or is lying) about plain stark fact. That is, students of Judy Wood at Clemson were given the opportunity to freely comment upon her capabilities as a teacher. The overwhelming consensus of those students was that she wasn't very good in her job. I do believe she was removed from her post soon after those comments. One can see there a probable reason for her dismissal.


Compus

 

[Macgyver1968]

I'm going to bed..I let ya'll deal with this guy

 

[jammonius]

So there's no chance that a 8 year old truck would have rust on it? before it was flipped by tornadic winds?

What exotic weaponry can cause rust on frame rails and exhaust systems but not on body panels?

Alright, at last, that's a little bit better. You, at least, are positing an alternative based on something akin to a "rule out" approach. Alright, then, that is fair enough.

What is not fair, however, is for you simply to don the cap of critic, endlessly asking for more proof. If you are not satisfied with Dr. Wood's explanation, quantum of proof then fine. You are not satisfied.

Perhaps there's an explanation you prefer; of course, if there is, you haven't cited it, have you.

I am not here to prove anything to you. I make claims. You and others can dispute them; where "can" means you have the potential to do so. What so many here fail to grasp is that name calling and ridicule is not proof of anything other than the emotional state of the people engaging in that kind of banter.

I do commend you, Macgyver, for rarely engaging in the worst kind of posting.

I'm going to stop for now.

More later on, another time.

 

[NoahFence]

Please don't.

 

[Cl1mh4224rd]

You asked for lurkers, because you were incapable of answering the questions of people like me. It was your way of trying to avoid questions you didn't have the answers to.

He's looking to the audience for support, to bail him out of an uncomfortable spot. Classic desperation and quite sad to witness when it fails.

 

[phiwum]

Besides jammonius I'm sure the rest of us understand the "context" in which those quotes were made.

Once again, it seems jammonius has difficulty comprehending (or is lying) about plain stark fact. That is, students of Judy Wood at Clemson were given the opportunity to freely comment upon her capabilities as a teacher. The overwhelming consensus of those students was that she wasn't very good in her job. I do believe she was removed from her post soon after those comments. One can see there a probable reason for her dismissal.

With due respect, RateMyProfessor comments should be taken with a very large grain of salt. We don't even know that these comments were written by her students, much less that they are representative of her students' views — or that students' views are particularly well-informed

I don't know anything about her dismissal and perhaps she really is an abysmal teacher, but I've learned that student responses on teaching evaluations are a pretty rough measure of skill, and responses on a voluntary, unaffiliated website like RateMyProfessor are that much worse.