NIST's Dr. Shyam Sunder On Truthyness Radio

[Walter Ego]

Last Thursday, August 21st, No Lies Radio News brought you live coverage of the N.I.S.T news conference on their final report on the collapse of World Trade Tower Building 7 and we followed immediately with a live broadcast of the AE911Truth.org news conference with their response showing the flaws in the N.I.S.T report. That day, Allan Rees, of No Lies Radio News, was granted an interview with Dr. Shyam Sunder, who presented the report at their news conference and who is the lead WTC investigator for NIST.

Coming up Sunday, August 24th at 1:30pm Pacific - 4:30pm Eastern - 20:30 GMT
Repeated Monday, August 25th at 1:30pm Pacific - 4:30pm Eastern - 20:30 GMT

http://www.911blogger.com/node/17316

Sunder did pretty well answering the truthers at the NIST press briefing so this should be interesting.

 

[mrbaracuda]

Meh, I dunno. Do you or anyone else have experience with how the 'No Lies Radio' people conduct there shows? For all I know it might deterioate quickly into what the infowars tard at the NIST Q&A pulled off.

 

[boloboffin]

One of my favorite parts of the press conference was after they finally stuffed a sock into Shane Geiger's mouth:

SUNDER: Yeah, very quickly. There are thousand pages of reports right there. It’s on the website. I urge you to read it, understand it, and when you’ve understood it, we can have a discussion.

God, I know how he felt at that moment.

 

[Ragnarok]

It's funny, but some might see his response to that "infowars tard" as being typical dodging of a relevant question.

 

[T.A.M.]

No. Most who understand the frustration that goes along with showing the infowars tards the answers to these questions over and over again, would probably see it as getting fed up with his ********, and telling him politely to **** off.

TAM

 

[mrbaracuda]

It's funny, but some might see his response to that "infowars tard" as being typical dodging of a relevant question.

Like T.A.M. said, he was politely telling him to **** off because he was rude and is a nut that can't be reasoned with anyway. I'm pretty sure NIST members have a good understanding of what nutty crap is being slinged at them.

 

[Ragnarok]

And someone of a more devious mindset might then suggest he was just avoiding a question asking, was the initial domino that set the collapse in motion fire, or something else(And not just a possible 'explosive device'!). Something that they never actually admitted to doing computer simulations of, to test the feasibility.

 

[bje]

One of my favorite parts of the press conference was after they finally stuffed a sock into Shane Geiger's mouth:

God, I know how he felt at that moment.

I agree. I would add Sunder's next elegant response also (emphasis mine):

SUNDER: You can send -- submit questions to us in writing and we’ll look at -- we will look at -- we will look at what you have to say. But I will reassert what I have said all along, that the findings that we have got, we are very comfortable with. It’s based on sound science, it’s consistent with the observations, it’s simple, it’s straightforward, it’s elegant, it’s practical. It’s understandable by people. When you -- and we looked at, as I said, all of the alternative theories that were presented. There were only a few that rose to be credible in our technical judgment. When we see evidence that in fact you have robust science behind alternative theories, we will look at them.

 

[mrbaracuda]

And someone of a more devious mindset might then suggest he was just avoiding a question asking

Thing is, whether or not you have noticed it by now, the infowars tard was a complete ass. How will you if you were Sunder answer this ****storm:

GEIGER: Hi. My name is Shane Geiger. I’m reporting from Infowars.com. I hear quite a number of bare assertions here today, and it’d be interesting to look at the research behind all of this. I look at your charts there in particular, and I wonder how it is that you -- I wonder how it is that those were produced since you state that you had absolutely no steel from the World Trade Center Seven building. I’m also very interested in how you state in your September 27, 2007 response to a Data Quality Assurance Act request that you were unable to find -- unable to provide a full explanation for the total collapse, and you reiterated from your Twin Towers report that NIST has stated it found no corroborating evidence to suggest that explosives were used to bring down the buildings. Now in the very next sentence --
SUNDER: Well --
GEIGER: You admit that NIST did not conduct tests for explosive residue. So of course it’s very difficult to find what you’re not looking for.
STEIN: OK, we’re --
GEIGER: The iron-rich spheres that are characteristic of the dust and can be seen on the [mic removed] United States Geological Survey website, and [mic returned] these are found in every single sample of the dust to date, including all the samples that R.J. Lee Group took a look at. I actually have a friend --
STEIN: OK, we’re going to move on.
AE911Truth.INFO PDF 19
GEIGER: [off microphone] who found these --
STEIN: I think you’ve given enough questions.
GEIGER: I think there’s enough of these out there. There’s a billion tons of the WTC dust in a landfill on Staten Island. I think it’s pretty fair to say that NIST could, if NIST were interested in doing so --
PORTER: Do you have a question, sir?
GEIGER: These spheres, inside these spheres, Dr. Steven Jones is claiming that there --
STEIN: OK, we have to --
GEIGER: Thermite reaction.
STEIN: Move on.
GEIGER: I would certainly like to hear a little bit about your research on this, rather than bare assertions.
STEIN: OK, could you comment on some of what was said, thanks.

Eh? The only reasonable answer one could give without taking dozens of notes about insanity is *drumroll*:

SUNDER: Yeah, very quickly. There are thousand pages of reports right there. It’s on the website. I urge you to read it, understand it, and when you’ve understood it, we can have a discussion.

 

[Brainster]

Thing is, whether or not you have noticed it by now, the infowars tard was a complete ass. How will you if you were Sunder answer this ****storm:

I'd answer it like this:

"Guards, would you please tase that man?"

 

[boloboffin]

I'd answer it like this:

"Guards, would you please tase that man?"

It might have added some inflection to his tone of voice.

 

[T.A.M.]

Don't taze me Shyam!

TAM

 

[mrbaracuda]

Don't taze me Shyam!

TAM

Seeing 'Shyam' again, has any twoofer made 'Sham' out of his name yet?

 

[Sizzler]

Did anyone catch this interview?

Did anyone make a transcript?

There should be a lot of good information that came out of that interview regarding Shyam's position on alternative hypotheses.

 

[Walter Ego]

Did anyone catch this interview?

Did anyone make a transcript?

There should be a lot of good information that came out of that interview regarding Shyam's position on alternative hypotheses.

The program will be available here after the repeat broadcast today.

 

[boloboffin]

David Ray was apparently on in the hours before Sunder to soften up the crowd.

 

[Bobert]

Meh, I dunno. Do you or anyone else have experience with how the 'No Lies Radio' people conduct there shows? For all I know it might deterioate quickly into what the infowars tard at the NIST Q&A pulled off.

Do you have a link to that video/audio clip?
Thanks!

 

[mrbaracuda]

Do you have a link to that video/audio clip?
Thanks!

Have a look in this thread. It's near the end. The infowars guy is the last. The Q&A part is about 30 minutes long I think, and the presentation about 20.

 

[Sizzler]

The program will be available here after the repeat broadcast today.

Thanks for the info.

I find it a little odd that Dr. Shyam Sunder accepted an interview with 'No Lies Radio'. Surely he knows the positions held on that radio station.

On a related, but unsubstantiated note, some have been discussing the possibility that Sunder and his team at NIST are discretely throwing in the towel with WTC7. Perhaps opening up doors for serious scrutiny and real alternative hypothesis testing.

There are a few reasons why some people have been discussing such possibility. The biggest reason is the surprise announcement of a "new phenomenon" responsible for the collapses, and the almost complete abandonment from diesel fires, and massive structural damage.

I myself don't speculate such, but do find it interesting that others are doing so.

 

[Pardalis]

Regardless of these speculations, Siz, you do understand that we're billions of light years from "controlled demolition"?