Jowenko sticks by his statement. (Audio from yesterday)

No, it can't. Science relies on hard data.

If you want to prove that the report has been influenced by politics, simply show where they erred. The data won't lie.

Prove them wrong.
 
parmanides said:
Two equally intelligent people can see the same facts and come up with different interpretations according to their political world view.
Click to expand...

What about the hundreds of engineers in the scientific community that don't agree with the very few woos out there?
 
Newsflash!!

human beings (for it is they who write scientific reports) live in a logical vacuum bubble with no emotional (therefore political) impulses shaping their perspective or investigative outcomes.

news to me. And how very 'unscientific' of you to not take the whole human into account :)
 
parmanides said:
Newsflash!!

human beings (for it is they who write scientific reports) live in a logical vacuum bubble with no emotional (therefore political) impulses shaping their perspective or investigative outcomes.

news to me. And how very 'unscientific' of you to not take the whole human into account :)
Click to expand...

What in the world is that supposed to mean? Are you now suggesting that we ignore science because people can be politically biased?
 
parmanides said:
That 'chestnut' is a sociological fact.

If you mailman were to (for whatever reason) become a 'conspiracy theorist', would you not loose the esteem and emotional kudos of most of the people here. If you were given a salary via them to make your posts, would you not then jeopardise your livelyhood.
Click to expand...

The reason I would loose the esteem and emotional kudos of my fellow peers is simply because when you become a member of the 9/11 cult you become a moron and credibility becomes a thing of the past.

Mailman
 
Quad4_72 said:
What in the world is that supposed to mean? Are you now suggesting that we ignore science because people can be politically biased?
Click to expand...

if you like your reality black and white Quad4 then yes.

me, i like to use science AND see its limitations

Its just not my religion reverend
 
Last edited:
mailman said:
The reason I would loose the esteem and emotional kudos of my fellow peers is simply because when you become a member of the 9/11 cult you become a moron and credibility becomes a thing of the past.

Mailman
Click to expand...

regardless of whether or not you would make such a conversion (and god forbid, be proven wrong), the sociological fact STILL remains
 
Last edited:
parmanides said:
if you like your reality black and white Quad4 then yes.

me, i like to use science AND see its limitations

Its just not my religion reverend
Click to expand...

If its good science, NO politics are involved. That is the kind of science I use. So what are the political motives and agendas of the leaders of the "truth" movement? How does it effect their science? (As has been proven time and time again, it effects their science A LOT)
 
Quad4_72 said:
If its good science, NO politics are involved. That is the kind of science I use. So what are the political motives and agendas of the leaders of the "truth" movement? How does it effect their science? (As has been proven time and time again, it effects their science A LOT)
Click to expand...

my point exactly -which is why Jowenko is so valuable
 
parmanides said:
my point exactly -which is why Jowenko is so valuable
Click to expand...

Peer review is key. Writing down random beliefs about what you THINK happened or what it LOOKED like is not sufficient evidence. When Jowenko writes a peer reviewed paper that has been submitted to credible peer review sources, let us know.
 
The collapse of WTC 7 does look like a controlled demolition in the same way that a DC-8 looks like a Boeing 707. Or, if you prefer, in the same way that a coral snake might look like a red milk snake. That doesn't mean one = the other.
 
Isn't there a paper written by a demo expert debunking CD? I remember seeing it on some site but I can't find it.
 
parmanides said:
regardless of whether or not you would make such a conversion (and god forbid, be proven wrong), the sociological fact STILL remains
Click to expand...

The only fact here is that morons like Jones et al are exactly that...morons.

They have been ostracised because they are wacko's.

Mailman
 
First of all, I appreciate the honesty in your opinions Parmanides. Here are my comments on them:


parmanides said:
That 'chestnut' is a sociological fact.

If you mailman were to (for whatever reason) become a 'conspiracy theorist', would you not loose the esteem and emotional kudos of most of the people here. If you were given a salary via them to make your posts, would you not then jeopardise your livelyhood.

regardless of whether or not you would make such a conversion, the socialogical fact remains
Click to expand...

I don't buy this when it comes to the murder of thousands of people. I for one, would risk my job and my livelihood in a heartbeat if I thought to not do so would allow the murderer of 3000 people to go free. I would like to think that most of my fellow human beings would do so as well.

parmanides said:
I refer to my last post. If you have a context (and the emotional investment that that entails), a long drawn out investigations can easily be bent to conform to your own preconceptions. Sometimes (not always) the immediate impression is just as valuable as the rabbithole of self deception that a longer 'scientific' investigation entails.

Two equally intelligent people can see the same facts and come up with different interpretations according to their political world view. This guy had no emotional investment and saw it how it was. as someone has mentioned, he has had the courage to investigate further and maintain his position without the emotional hijacking that is rife in this debate - a truly rare and scientifically 'pure' development.

Sometimes over investigating the facts in detail can be a block to the truth - you would rather focus upon an elaborate and hyperthetical scientific explanation that supports your political worldview, than see the elephant in the room. Its really hard to explain to overly logical people that their most treasured faculty may actually lead to an ultimately irrational stance.

BTW i dont support demolition of WTC1 and 2 - I just find WTC7 completely perplexing and appreciate all of you guys being here to help me get my own answers

thanks
Click to expand...

This is a complete fallacy in almost all cases, particularly complex issues such as the collapses of the towers. If we have never seen a building collapse straight down by any other means than CD (ie the argument that no skyscraper has collapsed due to fire, so what else has caused them to come down), than of course anyone, expert or idiot, will say a building coming straight down looks like a "demolition", as it is our only frame of reference wrt collapsing buildings. The scientific investigation, details surrounding the collapse, debris/airliners hitting it are all VITAL to the TRUTH of why the buildings collapsed, not simply watching a VIDEO of the collapse.

parmanides said:
'science' can also be politics too
Click to expand...

NO, science, in its pure form is not politics. Politics can EFFECT Science, it can manipulate the outcomes of science, but science IS NOT politics.


parmanides said:
my point exactly -which is why Jowenko is so valuable
Click to expand...

Jowenko is valuable to the CT movement for what he hasnt said, for what he hasnt looked at. He is valuable because he has made the blanket statement of "WTC7 was done via CD" without examining the evidence (in my opinion, as I do not believe he has read the NIST report).

Trust me, I would bet money that if Jowenko read and UNDERSTOOD the NIST, he would likely retract his statement, or at least make it less absolute.

TAM:)
 
I would like one thing from Jowenko - his explanation for the lack of seismic spikes that would occur from explosive detonations at WTC7. No seismic spikes = no CD. If he comes up with a wooish explanation for this, then he is a lost cause.
 
I think the entire industry would like to know the method for rigging a building for CD in a matter of a couple of hours. It'd save millions.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom