Scientists and Truthers

[FM21.105]

Well allow me to be the first person to say, it is my opinion (as a magician) that 9.11 was not an inside job.

So far, 100% of all magicians who have commented on the topic all agree (all one of us)

 

[1337m4n]

I personally work with a chemist (PhD Chemistry, MS/BS Materials Science) who is a creationist. He is arguably the smartest guy I know, but he just believes this one dumb thing.

Maybe he has high INT but low WIS?



Sorry, couldn't resist the urge to make a D & D reference.

 

[Jonnyclueless]

Ah yes, for centuries now scientists have been unable to figure out magic tricks because those darned magicians keep hiding the evidence. Scientists are simply no match for magicians! Probably the problem with creationism. It's all covered up by magic tricks.

 

[Crazy Chainsaw]

Your lucky Wildly, I got a PM, on another forum, from a Muslim in either Pakistan or Iran telling me that, I now have a fatwa issued against my life for my lies and insulting Innocent Muslims like Bin Laden.
Well since I never intend to go to Iran or Pakistan I do not think I have to worry, I must have really made some one mad to get that I guess.
Real scientist Wildly and I do not claim to be one of those, would know the difference between melting temperature and oxidation temperature and that chemical reactions happen in fires.
They would not be looking for junk evidence.
PS. I have great respect for religions, even Islam, however I have no respect for those who try to excuse murder of innocents by any means.

 

[Quad4_72]

Was that a serious post max?

 

[Pardalis]

Max, are you aware that one of the leaders in the Truth Movement is a theologian?

 

[Max Photon]

She blinded me with teleology

Hhhhh....

Guys, put away the theology and and creationism. You're shadow boxing.

What I am saying is very simple.

The scientific method - a structured thinking process - can be used to investigate a lot of things - including the scientific method! (You know, Science X Science = Science-squared, or higher-order science.)

This can be taken farther. The scientific method can be used to indentify exploitable susceptibilities in the scientific method, and to use these to influence or control the scientific method, if only to deceive it.

This would be teleology, as I am using it. So for example, MILDEC and demolition planners identified exploitable susceptibilities of both the towers, and of the experts (and the scientific method), and wove a demolition plan between the two sets of susceptibilities.

The optimal solution to was to demolish the towers, not by explosive or thermal cutting, but by heat-weakening, using oh-so ambiguous thermite as the incendiary, and then cloaking the arson by using the jet-induced fires as an ambiguity-reducing deception, to make the experts CERTAIN that the fires were from the jets only, so Arson Investigation Team, you can all go home and wrap yourselves in a nice warm flag.


If there were no catalysts used in the towers, then the problem is a scientific problem.

If there were catalysts used in the towers - if the were deus ex machina - then the problem is a teleological problem.

I say the scientific process is being used to cloak the teleological nature of the problem.


Max


P.S. Incidentally, the financial markets are poorly modeled scientifically (just look at the Quantity Theory of Money imploding all around us). There are ghosts in the machine. The markets are rigged.

 

[Pardalis]

Is "teleology" another name for solipsism? If so I'm outta here.

 

[1337m4n]

How does one solve a teleological problem?

 

[Pardalis]

How does one solve a teleological problem?

A trip to the johns usually does the trick.

 

[FM21.105]

Since no one else will take you seriously (Can't say I don't blame them), I guess I'll be a nice guy and help you through this...

If there were no catalysts used in the towers, then the problem is a scientific problem.

If there were catalysts used in the towers - if the were deus ex machina - then the problem is a teleological problem.

It's the other way around. If no catalysts were used, science would not be needed. If catalysts were used, science could tell us what the catalyst was, how it was used, how long it was applied and in what fashion

 

[1337m4n]

Since no one else will take you seriously

I'm plenty serious. The argument is that we can't solve the problem via science, so I want to know how we CAN solve the problem.

 

[Max Photon]

To solve how the WTC controlled-demolitions were done, become a trick-hunter.

I'm plenty serious. The argument is that we can't solve the problem via science, so I want to know how we CAN solve the problem.

Simple. Just think like a scientist who is not studying rocks or something, but rather, other scientists, who are trying to prevent one from studying them.

Think like someone who is studying a magic illusionist.


Become a trick-hunter.



Max the Magnificent

 

[FM21.105]

Simple. Just think like a scientist who is not studying rocks or something, but rather, other scientists, who are trying to prevent one from studying them.

Think like someone who is studying a magic illusionist.


Become a trick-hunter.



Max the Magnificent

Max, when the troofers quit trying to use science to explain their troofiness, debunkers will naturally lay back on science.

Also, I'm interested, what is it you think happened on 9.11, Max? Use your trick-hunting skills (Would have helped a lot in this thread) to inform us what happened.

 

[Max Photon]

Paul's Magic Filter removes pesky high-order noise in the form of military deception

Max, when the troofers quit trying to use science to explain their troofiness, debunkers will naturally lay back on science.

I didn't say to quit science.

Look, the scientific process is a process - an iterative or repetitive process. One can also think of it as the scientific spiral.

The deception process - the deception spiral - is an spiral that opposes the scientific spiral.

Opposing spirals create optical illusions.

So, a scientist in the face of a teleological event, like the cloaked controlled demolitions of the WTC towers, needs to filter out the opposing spirals of deception. Paul's Magic Filter is designed to do exactly that!

By setting deception to zero, the physics - the plain, simple physics - can be clearly seen.

All of this is really nothing more than controlling for experimental noise, but in this case, high-order noise - military deception.

Max

 

[DarkMagician]

I didn't say to quit science.

Look, the scientific process is a process - an iterative or repetitive process. One can also think of it as the scientific spiral.

The deception process - the deception spiral - is an spiral that opposes the scientific spiral.

Opposing spirals create optical illusions.

And wi' the spirals, we can make a perdy! And wi' this perdy, we can hypnotize the scienti--
*stares at spirals, eyes go out of focus, pass out*

 

[1337m4n]

I didn't say to quit science.

Look, the scientific process is a process - an iterative or repetitive process. One can also think of it as the scientific spiral.

The deception process - the deception spiral - is an spiral that opposes the scientific spiral.

Opposing spirals create optical illusions.

So, a scientist in the face of a teleological event, like the cloaked controlled demolitions of the WTC towers, needs to filter out the opposing spirals of deception. Paul's Magic Filter is designed to do exactly that!

By setting deception to zero, the physics - the plain, simple physics - can be clearly seen.

All of this is really nothing more than controlling for experimental noise, but in this case, high-order noise - military deception.

Max

Max, Max, Max, I'm getting too old for all this fancy jargon. Could you put this into layman's terms, or in the form of a spiffy metaphor?

 

[Orphia Nay]

On another forum (FCN if you must know) I was recently on the receiving end on a cry of "BS" from a truther there.

I basically said that 99% of scientists don't support them.

This guy then sort of complains that I am "making up evidence" when I only said the number because it just shows a minority really well.

But it got me thinking, what percentage of scientists in the relevant fields are actually truthers? Do they even make 1% of those scientists?

The 99% factor is probably too low, if you assume that those who have not spoken up on the matter are accepting of the official account of 9/11. This is a big assumption, although one often used (The silent majority).

Personally, I think if all scientists were polled, it would go more like 80-90% of scientists accept the official account, 10-20% do not, and 0-10% are undecided.

TAM

Really? I saw Wildy's discussion at FCN and thought he'd underestimated the numbers of scientists... I would have said 99.9%.

By "scientists" I was thinking of just civil and structural engineers, and physicists. These are people who understand the mechanism of collapse, and the laws of physics, and who wouldn't fall for "hushaboom explosives" theories.

10% of scientists who are MIHOP, TAM? That's over twice as many MIHOPpers in general as the twoofer's own Zogby poll indicates.

Look at the number of scientists who've published or worked on papers supporting the official story. And then look at the number of scientists who've published anything supporting MIHOP - I can think of one, if you can call an ex-professor, Steven Jones, a scientist.

 

[Wildy]

Really? I saw Wildy's discussion at FCN and thought he'd underestimated the numbers of scientists... I would have said 99.9%.

Still got shouted down for it though. There were cries of "he's fabricating evidence" or "he doesn't have evidence so he has to make it up".

Then again these are people who couldn't understand Crazy Chainsaw's toner argument.

Look at the number of scientists who've published or worked on papers supporting the official story. And then look at the number of scientists who've published anything supporting MIHOP - I can think of one, if you can call an ex-professor, Steven Jones, a scientist.

On another note, if "Steven" was spelled "Stephen" then I would feel sorry for the Director of Academic and Student Services at my uni...

 

[Jonnyclueless]

Oh dear lord...

So now we're trying to replace science with philosophy because that darn science keeps disproving someone's fantasies.