• 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.

Science Denial

So comprehension .. understanding... of the events at the WTC demands careful observations and the technical background to understand what you are seeing.

Years ago, "independent" researchers on sites such as 911FF took this approach and produced logical coherent and internally consistent explanations.

However. the visual observations are truly and incomplete set of data. For one we can't see inside the building because the facade largely blocks one's view. Secondly we don't have temperature data for the flames... and assumptions are required... where they were burning and for how long... and of course how hot were they.

Gage relied on flawed reasoning such as.... if it looks like a duck and quacks like a duck it MUST BE a duck. So he shows a building collapsing from a CD and says... look at the similarity. Anyone can see 7WTC was a CD.

The entire truth arguments were based on incorrect, incomplete observations, misunderstanding and incomplete or no understand of structure, fire and engineering. We got a garbage in garbage out... but the naive person failed to see the slight. People are fooled by magic too. Don't you believe your eyes?
 
JSanderO said:
So comprehension .. understanding... of the events at the WTC demands careful observations and the technical background to understand what you are seeing.

Years ago, "independent" researchers on sites such as 911FF took this approach and produced logical coherent and internally consistent explanations.

However. the visual observations are truly and incomplete set of data. For one we can't see inside the building because the facade largely blocks one's view. Secondly we don't have temperature data for the flames... and assumptions are required... where they were burning and for how long... and of course how hot were they.

Gage relied on flawed reasoning such as.... if it looks like a duck and quacks like a duck it MUST BE a duck. So he shows a building collapsing from a CD and says... look at the similarity. Anyone can see 7WTC was a CD.

The entire truth arguments were based on incorrect, incomplete observations, misunderstanding and incomplete or no understand of structure, fire and engineering. We got a garbage in garbage out... but the naive person failed to see the slight. People are fooled by magic too. Don't you believe your eyes?
Click to expand...

Gage Just followed Steven Jones's lies, Steven E.Jones set up the original conspiracy theories by lying and Trying to claim evidence that wasn't present.
It was grifting all along and remains grifting to this day!
 
What was the motivation of the original truthers?
Were they naive and not intentionally dishonest... just kinda dumb?
After some time and lots of sites debunking truther nonsense... stinking with the truther line is would be grifting, exploitation... and for sire willful ignorance and self delusion.

The psychology of dumb and delusion and willful ignorance is more interesting the the actual collapse dynamics.
 
JSanderO said:
What was the motivation of the original truthers?
Were they naive and not intentionally dishonest... just kinda dumb?
After some time and lots of sites debunking truther nonsense... stinking with the truther line is would be grifting, exploitation... and for sire willful ignorance and self delusion.

The psychology of dumb and delusion and willful ignorance is more interesting the the actual collapse dynamics.
Click to expand...

Motivation? At its root it's a political statement. After that, anything that confirms the point in their mind is fair play.

I think the root cause is most Truthers, like most people, are naive and ignorant. The insistence that the events of 9/11 would have "broken the laws of physics" just sounds crazy to people who know what they're talking about, but most people tend to overestimate how much they know. I've been trained from movies that firing a bullet into a vehicle's fuel tank will make it explode. I don't know if it would, and I haven't done any research to confirm whether this can happen, but if I was less skeptical I may fall for a conspiracy theory that engages my ingrained belief.
 
Most people are very ignorant as far as science and engineering for sure. They/we go through life believing that engineers who understand are behind all the things we take for granted... cars, planes, elevators... cell phones... you name it. And in fact practically speaking there is no need or purpose in "understanding" how things work... unless you have to maintain or repair them.
So people see explosions and CDs in the media and the media is their frame of reference for what is possible. And the media, unless "science fiction" tries to stick the the possible.
So along come a series of narcissists who are looking for attention, a buck or both and the exploit the naive public... much the way a cult leader does... Oh wait... Gage was the 911Truth cult leader! The church of 911Truth... Leave your critical thinking at the door... and your donations right over here.
 
JSanderO said:
So comprehension .. understanding... of the events at the WTC demands careful observations and the technical background to understand what you are seeing.

Years ago, "independent" researchers on sites such as 911FF took this approach and produced logical coherent and internally consistent explanations.

However. the visual observations are truly and incomplete set of data. For one we can't see inside the building because the facade largely blocks one's view. Secondly we don't have temperature data for the flames... and assumptions are required... where they were burning and for how long... and of course how hot were they.

Gage relied on flawed reasoning such as.... if it looks like a duck and quacks like a duck it MUST BE a duck. So he shows a building collapsing from a CD and says... look at the similarity. Anyone can see 7WTC was a CD.

The entire truth arguments were based on incorrect, incomplete observations, misunderstanding and incomplete or no understand of structure, fire and engineering. We got a garbage in garbage out... but the naive person failed to see the slight. People are fooled by magic too. Don't you believe your eyes?
Click to expand...




So comprehension .. understanding... of the events at the WTC demands careful observations and the technical background to understand what you are seeing.
Years ago, "independent" researchers on sites such as 911FF took this approach and produced logical coherent and internally consistent explanations.
Click to expand...
911FF ? Was that Eric Lawyer's group?...
Independent researchers that comprehend and have an understanding of fire science took-up the challenge
and using careful observations and their technical background to understand,
applied this approach and produced logical and internally consistent explanations.
OK

Please post a link to the final results their work produced and explain how their explanations, that impressed you
enough that you used them as an example, affirm your convictions.
 
Last edited:
JSanderO said:
Most people are very ignorant as far as science and engineering for sure. They/we go through life believing that engineers who understand are behind all the things we take for granted... cars, planes, elevators... cell phones... you name it. And in fact practically speaking there is no need or purpose in "understanding" how things work... unless you have to maintain or repair them.
So people see explosions and CDs in the media and the media is their frame of reference for what is possible. And the media, unless "science fiction" tries to stick the the possible.
So along come a series of narcissists who are looking for attention, a buck or both and the exploit the naive public... much the way a cult leader does... Oh wait... Gage was the 911Truth cult leader! The church of 911Truth... Leave your critical thinking at the door... and your donations right over here.
Click to expand...
It was ignorance and Grifting you have to Remember a lot of what they first produced was based on Propaganda, both Russian, Chinese and from Iran, and Venezuela.
 
Fonebone said:
911FF ? Was that Eric Lawyer's group?...
Independent researchers that comprehend and have an understanding of fire science took-up the challenge
and using careful observations and their technical background to understand,
applied this approach and produced logical and internally consistent explanations.
OK

Please post a link to the final results their work produced and explain how their explanations, that impressed you
enough that you used them as an example, affirm your convictions.
Click to expand...

He is referring to ROOSD, on the 9/11 Free Forums.
 
JSanderO said:
read these sites:
http://www.sharpprintinginc.com/911/

and

https://www.tapatalk.com/groups/the...l0FV3A88qVk-1631739082-0-gqNtZGzNAlCjcnBszQlR
Click to expand...


I thank you for those resources ...


No ! I want a link to the results of the 911FF Study, the one you want the stupido and ignorant "Twoofers" to emulate.
Then, using the techniques that you they stated arrived at logical conclusions using their technical skills and knowledge to
form their opinions, We should arrive at the exact same conclusions.
The 911FF may have been behind the "outing" of Triforcharity as a class A fraud and if what you say about them is true
they would have made their findings public somewhere.
A link will do. Links to other sites is unacceptable.
 
Last edited:
Interesting that truthers don't bother to look for all material about the collapses online. I post two links with many discussions and much wisdom.
But believing Gage's comical presentations seem to make sense to them.

We are a nation of idiots and willfully ignorant people.
 
JSanderO said:
What was the motivation of the original truthers?
Were they naive and not intentionally dishonest... just kinda dumb?
After some time and lots of sites debunking truther nonsense... stinking with the truther line is would be grifting, exploitation... and for sire willful ignorance and self delusion.

The psychology of dumb and delusion and willful ignorance is more interesting the the actual collapse dynamics.
Click to expand...

I've told this story before, but it fits...

On 9/15/2001 I went to the local metaphysical bookstore to visit. Back then I was deeper into the Woo, and the bookstore was where I attended UFO discussion-group meetings back in the 1990s (just for background). I'm talking with the owner hoping to get caught up with UFO gossip but all he wants to talk about his how the 9-11 attacks were suspicious. He rattled a list of things off, such as the claim that footage of Palestinians celebrating in the streets was actually four years old (in the footage there are two cars which are 2001 makes).

I asked him where he was getting this from and he said he'd received a fax from a guy in Sacramento, a guy who was a big promoter of the chem-trail conspiracy.

I've never been back to that bookstore.

Anytime a country goes to war conspiracy theories grow like weeds.
 
JSanderO said:
Interesting that truthers don't bother to look for all material about the collapses online. I post two links with many discussions and much wisdom.
But believing Gage's comical presentations seem to make sense to them.

We are a nation of idiots and willfully ignorant people.
Click to expand...

As has been pointed out many times before, in the time since 9-11 Truthers could now have multiple PhDs in engineering AND physics using the same effort they put into wasting their brain power on CTs.
 
JSanderO said:
Interesting that truthers don't bother to look for all material about the collapses online. I post two links with many discussions and much wisdom.
But believing Gage's comical presentations seem to make sense to them.

We are a nation of idiots and willfully ignorant people.
Click to expand...

You can lead a Truther to Science, but you can't make him think,
 
you might find this article of interest
truthandshadows.com/2012/01/11/when-did-they-know-truth-leaders-on-how-they-awakened-to-the-911-lie/
it shows what we already know, that trutherism is about belief (religious conversion) and not about evidence. You might also be interested in a book by one of my colleagues at Lund U, entitled 'Knowledge Resistance' by Michael Klintmann. He also has a shorter piece in The Conversation. Basically Klintmann says that social togetherness trumps arguments, which is why people will resist good arguments if it means that they become isolated from their groups. Truthers are not just a lonely guy in a basement. They are a community. I do research on connspiracy theories and because I live in denmark, have had some interaction with Niels Harrit. I am also in academia and can attest that it is filled with some incredibly stupid, dogmatic, stubborn people. Steven Sampson, Lund, see focaalblog.com
 
Someone like Neils Harrit is smart enough to understand the rational consistent arguments about the collapse of the WTC buildings. He is an example of and educated science denier. I suspect he is a truther "luminary" for the ego. Hardly anyone would know him if he didn't jump on as a truther expert.
Sad man... pathetic because effectively he is not naive... he is deceitful.
 
Couple of points. Almost nobody denies science outright, mostly they deny scientific evidence that has implication or outright contradicts their pre-existing beliefs, most science deniers really just pick and choose which science they like.

Humans are not rational, we are rationalizing. The smarter and more well educated you are the better you are at rationalizing what you want to believe.

Its virtually impossible to tell if someone truly believes something or is merely using it to con folks. Even if you catch them in deliberate deception, they may think of it as a noble lie.
 
Last edited:
ahhell said:
Couple of points. Almost nobody denies science outright, mostly they deny scientific evidence that has implication or outright contradicts their pre-existing beliefs, most science deniers really just pick and choose which science they like.

Humans are not rational, we are rationalizing. The smarter and more well educated you are the better you are at rationalizing what you want to believe.

Its virtually impossible to tell if someone truly believes something or is merely using it to con folks. Even if you catch them in deliberate deception, they may think of it as a noble lie.
Click to expand...

This is excellent...
Gage will deny he denies science! He will assert that what he presents IS science. This is self serving. Science deniers IGNORE what contradicts their views on a topic. Essentially they "cherry pick" science which supports their view and ignore science that refutes it.
But in the case of someone like Gage and his professionals.... they SHOULD be aware of all the relevant science on the topic they advocate... and most likely they are. Engineering may rise above their pay grade...
Admittedly structural engineering and physics is above his pay grade. Chandler teaches physics and should know better... he is obviously in denial and lying. All of them should have "brushed up" on the state of the art.. collapse mechanics... before they opened their mouths. And when they did learn that they had made mistakes.... they should retract their incorrect statements. They don't. This is willful igorance with the intent to deceive... EXACTLY what they accuse NIST and the media of - INTENT to deceive.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom