Science vs Teleology: Which lens is best for viewing 911?

[Hokulele]

Oh, and thanks, Hokulele, for the kind words about my Hari Seldon post. Unfortunately it appears to have confused Max Photon. I'll have to try harder next time.

Your avatar plus the Hari Seldon reference possibly made that post more delightful than the point being made. Possibly.

 

[metamars]

Twoofers fabricated their baseless myths about the collapse of WTC 7 because Silverstein is a Jew.

Baloney. If his name was Chu or Collangelo, do you think that the rapid, symetrical collapse of WTC 7, as well as the "pull it" comment, would not have elicited a great amount of suspicion, by most of the 911 Truth movement that is familiar with these facts?

Note well that the question is not "Can we find some bona-fide Jew haters in the 911 Truth movement, who relishes the fact that Silverstein is Jewish, since their suspicions of him reinforce their own hatreds?" Indeed, you can. You can also find bona fide Jew haters who think the earth is flat, and more still who think the earth is round. That tells you nothing about flat earthers or round earthers in general, try as you might to smear the former group. Or the latter, for that matter.

 

[applecorped]

Baloney. If his name was Chu or Collangelo, do you think that the rapid, symetrical collapse of WTC 7, as well as the "pull it" comment, would not have elicited a great amount of suspicion, by most of the 911 Truth movement that is familiar with these facts?

Note well that the question is not "Can we find some bona-fide Jew haters in the 911 Truth movement, who relishes the fact that Silverstein is Jewish, since their suspicions of him reinforce their own hatreds?" Indeed, you can. You can also find bona fide Jew haters who think the earth is flat, and more still who think the earth is round. That tells you nothing about flat earthers or round earthers in general, try as you might to smear the former group. Or the latter, for that matter.

Denounce them.

 

[metamars]

As you know, if Larry Silverstein's last name were Jones, we wouldn't be talking about the collapse of WTC 7.

An absolutely ludicrous assertion.

I have to admit, though, if his full name was Stephen Jones, I'd be a little confused.

 

[pomeroo]

Baloney. If his name was Chu or Collangelo, do you think that the rapid, symetrical collapse of WTC 7, as well as the "pull it" comment, would not have elicited a great amount of suspicion, by most of the 911 Truth movement that is familiar with these facts?

Note well that the question is not "Can we find some bona-fide Jew haters in the 911 Truth movement, who relishes the fact that Silverstein is Jewish, since their suspicions of him reinforce their own hatreds?" Indeed, you can. You can also find bona fide Jew haters who think the earth is flat, and more still who think the earth is round. That tells you nothing about flat earthers or round earthers in general, try as you might to smear the former group. Or the latter, for that matter.

WTC 7 was a building nobody had ever heard of. It was heavily damaged by tons of falling debris, and the resultant extensive fires led firefighters to conclude that it was very likely to collapse. No conspiracy liar has yet come close to fitting this event into any sort of coherent fantasy.

There is nothing suspicious about the collapse of this building. Fantasists tacked it on to their laundry list because, well, they're frikkin' nuts. The "pull it" canard has been as thoroughly demolished as any pernicious falsehood can possibly be. Absolutely nothing in Silverstein's innocuous agreement with the FDNY's assessment relates to demolition--nothing.

 

[1337m4n]

I'd like to ask a question of Max, hopefully to "re-rail" the thread, so to speak.

I don't know exactly how to word this. I'll just do the best I can and you can ask for any clarification.

Now, Max, you know that science has a process to it. A method. And we even call it such, "the scientific method". Observe, hypothesize, experiment, record, lather, rinse, repeat. That is the scientific method.

I guess, what I'm trying to ask is, is there a process to teleological thinking? Is there a "teleological method", a way to "do teleology", so to speak?

 

[metamars]

Denounce them.

Who are you to give me orders? Will your next order to me be to wear a lapel flag pin, so as to show my patriotism? Should I also, as Bill O'Reilly demanded, "Shut up" about the US fiasco of it's invasion of Iraq, since our troops are already over there, suffering and dying? Why don't you make a complete list of orders that I should follow, for me to meet with your approval? If it's less than 20 items, or so, maybe I'll seriously consider them.

Don't hold your breath, though.

 

[applecorped]

I won't. You're predictable.

 

[Max Photon]

Coming to terms with teleology

Struggling to stay on topic... There is an additional distinction to make here. In most "soft" sciences, we are dealing with populations rather than individuals. The population rarely acts in a determined way to dominate an experiment, whereas an individual will. Although it does happen. The best known example of this behavior is probably the Long Term Capital Management collapse, where the market literally evolved new behaviors over time -- risks that were originally uncorrelated became correlated in response, and ultimately sank the company.

Soft science cannot treat individuals, because statistics don't apply even most of the time. Again, we are back to forensics and logical deduction. If that fails, then all we have is philosophy and speculation.

In dealing with individuals, whether or not forensics and logic are enough depends on the specific question. I'm still optimistic that most if not all questions of September 11^th lend themselves to this approach, and thus science is still the best answer.

Ryan, I am still trying to determine what term best describes the class of problems where experimental feedback is so great that the subject exerts control over the investigators and the investigation.

If not teleology, then ________?

 

[Max Photon]

There's a cupcake for everyone who stays vaguely on topic.

 

[T.A.M.]

We don't need your stinking Thermite Cupcakes!

TAM

 

[Max Photon]

Max, what a card

I'd like to ask a question of Max, hopefully to "re-rail" the thread, so to speak.

I don't know exactly how to word this. I'll just do the best I can and you can ask for any clarification.

Now, Max, you know that science has a process to it. A method. And we even call it such, "the scientific method". Observe, hypothesize, experiment, record, lather, rinse, repeat. That is the scientific method.

I guess, what I'm trying to ask is, is there a process to teleological thinking? Is there a "teleological method", a way to "do teleology", so to speak?

1337m4n,

Thanks for focusing.

To your question: Is there a "teleological method"?....

I'm not sure. I'm trying to figure that out. I've tried to put forth some starting places.

It would seem, for example, one could ask:

What changes in the scientific method are required to study card magicians vs. average people playing standard card games?

 

[Max Photon]

We don't need your stinking Thermite Cupcakes!

TAM

See TAM, you're bitter even when things are sweet.

 

[Max Photon]

Necessary Dillusion, by Max Photonsky

Metamars,

In the spirit of your bringing up Chomsky, look at the feedback in the system during 9/11. Just consider the image of the president and his staff with the TV in the background showing the burning towers!

Forty-two seconds after the second jet hit, Al Qaeda was reverberating in the media. That means forty-two seconds after the second hit, all investigators, all scientists, all engineers, all military personnel, even the president himself - everyone - is being branded with Al Qaeda did it.

It seems reasonable to at least wonder if this psychological branding introduced distortion - systemic bias - into the investigation of 911.

That is, unless one is a rabid member of the Thought Police.

 

[applecorped]

That is, unless, they did it.

 

[R.Mackey]

Ryan, I am still trying to determine what term best describes the class of problems where experimental feedback is so great that the subject exerts control over the investigators and the investigation.

If not teleology, then ________?

"Conflict of Interest."

Sorry I can't be more definite than that, but I'm not convinced that such a huge degree of control exists. Again, a smart investigator can plan for this and react, and this is typical of virtually every criminal investigation. Give me an example where you think this has occurred, and I can tell you how I'd attack it, and thereby give the process a name.

 

[yodaluver28]

Of course the media and government were suggesting Al Qaeda responsibility in the immediate wake of 9/11, they were by far the most obvious and likely prime suspect.

Al Qaeda and an affiliate cell in NYC had attempted to destroy the Twin Towers once before and it was no secret that they wanted to take them down for good at some point.

There had been broad, albeit vague warnings about a major Al Qaeda terror attack throughout the summer of 2001 and there was the belief that hijackings may be involved.

Then, one morning, two hijacked commercial jetliners intentionally smash into the Twin Towers of The World Trade Center. Of course Al Qaeda is gonna be the prime suspect to pretty much everyone who knows about them. That attack matched their goals, their MO, and their propensity for carrying out increasingly sophisticated, coordinated attacks.

When I saw the second plane crash into Tower 2 live on TV, it took me about 20 seconds to presume that it was someone tied to Bin Laden. I didn't need reporters or the government to tell me that, I don't think most people did.

 

[Max Photon]

Max, are you sure?

Of course the media and government were suggesting Al Qaeda responsibility in the immediate wake of 9/11, they were by far the most obvious and likely prime suspect.

Al Qaeda and an affiliate cell in NYC had attempted to destroy the Twin Towers once before and it was no secret that they wanted to take them down for good at some point.

There had been broad, albeit vague warnings about a major Al Qaeda terror attack throughout the summer of 2001 and there was the belief that hijackings may be involved.

Then, one morning, two hijacked commercial jetliners intentionally smash into the Twin Towers of The World Trade Center. Of course Al Qaeda is gonna be the prime suspect to pretty much everyone who knows about them. That attack matched their goals, their MO, and their propensity for carrying out increasingly sophisticated, coordinated attacks.

When I saw the second plane crash into Tower 2 live on TV, it took me about 20 seconds to presume that it was someone tied to Bin Laden. I didn't need reporters or the government to tell me that, I don't think most people did.

The function of ambiguity-reducing deception is to render the deception targets certain, decisive, and wrong.

From the US Armed Service Joint Publication 3-13.4: Military Deception

 

[pomeroo]

Ryan, I am still trying to determine what term best describes the class of problems where experimental feedback is so great that the subject exerts control over the investigators and the investigation.

If not teleology, then ________?

The term you seek violates forum guidelines. As a hint, it is produced by the male counterpart of a cow and it comes in steaming loads.

 

[pomeroo]

There's a cupcake for everyone who stays vaguely on topic.

After the battering you took on the mathematics of your fantasy, you have time to bake? And they said you can't have it all!