Waterboy Replies to Ryan Mackey

[tsig]

JamesB:

For such a serious issue as the cause of the collapse of the twin towers - a topic we claim to debate on this forum with technical precision - don't you think calling Mr. Ryan "Waterboy" is very childish and inappropriate? What point are you trying to make? Do you really think it strengthens your argument? Well let me tell you, it does not!

If you have taken the trouble to post about Mr. Ryan's writings, you obviously think he is worthy of some consideration and discussion, so please use his correct name in future. I am making this request because I was recently criticized by a moderator for the crime of miss-spelling someone's pseudonym - and I am sure the moderators wouldn't like the forum to have a double standard on this issue.

We would not want a double standard Apollo20. Why do you piss on your degree this way?

Should we kiss your ass in the morning or at night?

 

[JamesB]

JamesB:

For such a serious issue as the cause of the collapse of the twin towers - a topic we claim to debate on this forum with technical precision - don't you think calling Mr. Ryan "Waterboy" is very childish and inappropriate? What point are you trying to make? Do you really think it strengthens your argument? Well let me tell you, it does not!

If you have taken the trouble to post about Mr. Ryan's writings, you obviously think he is worthy of some consideration and discussion, so please use his correct name in future. I am making this request because I was recently criticized by a moderator for the crime of miss-spelling someone's pseudonym - and I am sure the moderators wouldn't like the forum to have a double standard on this issue.

No, I don't think he is worthy of consideration and discussion, anymore than I consider the theories of Willis Carto worthy of discussion, I think he is worthy of mockery. To the best of my knowledge the user agreements pertain to treatment of fellow board members, they do not require you to be polite to people who don't even post here, otherwise the political forums would be quite boring. Ryan has obviously visited this forum, but considered us beneath him and did not post. If he were to visit I would address him politely.

 

[Brainster]

JamesB:

For such a serious issue as the cause of the collapse of the twin towers - a topic we claim to debate on this forum with technical precision - don't you think calling Mr. Ryan "Waterboy" is very childish and inappropriate? What point are you trying to make? Do you really think it strengthens your argument? Well let me tell you, it does not!

If you have taken the trouble to post about Mr. Ryan's writings, you obviously think he is worthy of some consideration and discussion, so please use his correct name in future. I am making this request because I was recently criticized by a moderator for the crime of miss-spelling someone's pseudonym - and I am sure the moderators wouldn't like the forum to have a double standard on this issue.

Maybe we could go with "Lyin' Ryan"?

 

[~enigma~]

JamesB:

For such a serious issue as the cause of the collapse of the twin towers - a topic we claim to debate on this forum with technical precision - don't you think calling Mr. Ryan "Waterboy" is very childish and inappropriate? What point are you trying to make? Do you really think it strengthens your argument? Well let me tell you, it does not!

If you have taken the trouble to post about Mr. Ryan's writings, you obviously think he is worthy of some consideration and discussion, so please use his correct name in future. I am making this request because I was recently criticized by a moderator for the crime of miss-spelling someone's pseudonym - and I am sure the moderators wouldn't like the forum to have a double standard on this issue.

He tried to pass himself off as a manager of uL while he was a fired manager of a water testing plant. Aquaboy...Aquaman.....deal with it.

 

[JamesB]

Regarding this part at the end. What exactly has his lawsuit discovered? As far as I can tell the only thing that was discovered was that he did not have a case.

But it doesn’t take a US government scientist to know that suing for
wrongful termination in Indiana is not a high probability venture. Couple
this with the fact that suing UL in this case is really a matter of taking on the
US government and the Bush Administration’s entire power story, and we
all know pretty much what to expect. That means my legal actions against
UL are much like the fight for truth overall - it’s not about a final reward,
it’s about discovery. Of course, anonymous government apologists are not
likely to know much about that.

But then again, I am just an anonymous government apologist, so what do I know?

 

[DavidJames]

JamesB:

For such a serious issue as the cause of the collapse of the twin towers - a topic we claim to debate on this forum with technical precision - don't you think calling Mr. Ryan "Waterboy" is very childish and inappropriate? What point are you trying to make? Do you really think it strengthens your argument? Well let me tell you, it does not!

If you have taken the trouble to post about Mr. Ryan's writings, you obviously think he is worthy of some consideration and discussion, so please use his correct name in future. I am making this request because I was recently criticized by a moderator for the crime of miss-spelling someone's pseudonym - and I am sure the moderators wouldn't like the forum to have a double standard on this issue.

During initial interactions with anyone I try to be friendly and respectful. Once they reveal that they, through deception and disingenuous behavior, begin accusing people of mass murder without due process, my respect for them all but disappears. The fact that you are concerned over the name used for him and have no comments on his "work" and it's implications is interesting.

 

[~enigma~]

I got one paragraph in his Aqualetter but just didn't see the point in wasting any more time after he wrote

But for reasons that may shortly become obvious to the reader, a point-by-point rebuttal of Mackey’s lengthy paper is not necessary.

 

[jhunter1163]

*silently points to her screen name* Need I say more?

In actuality, you guys are in an unusual situation as regards my username; this is the only forum where I've used my actual name (albeit only my first name) as my username, largely because I was kind of bored of the other one I tend to use and couldn't think up a better one on the spur of the moment. C'est la vie.

As I've commented elsewhere, I'm not a big enough fish in the debunking pond for anyone to bother with harassing me (my successful smackdown of a Twoofer at the ESPN board notwithstanding). My real name and city of residence are in my profile; anyone who really wanted to get in contact with me could find me with little trouble. The trouble would begin if they actually tried to harass me: they would then reap the whirlwind that is Mrs. Jhunter1163.

 

[~enigma~]

As I've commented elsewhere, I'm not a big enough fish in the debunking pond for anyone to bother with harassing me (my successful smackdown of a Twoofer at the ESPN board notwithstanding). My real name and city of residence are in my profile; anyone who really wanted to get in contact with me could find me with little trouble. The trouble would begin if they actually tried to harass me: they would then reap the whirlwind that is Mrs. Jhunter1163.

Weird, you both share the same screenname and birthday

ETA - Anonymous internet poster

 

[LashL]

I was recently criticized by a moderator for the crime of miss-spelling someone's pseudonym - and I am sure the moderators wouldn't like the forum to have a double standard on this issue.

It is not a double standard, Apollo, unless the illustrious waterboy is a member posting here.

 

[Swing Dangler]

Kevin Ryan replies to Ryan Mackey, in one of those famous "peer reviewed" letters at the Journal of 9/11 Stundies.
He makes it all the way to the second paragraph before launching the ad homimem attack.
http://journalof911studies.com/letters/b/MackeyLetter.pdf
I guess David Ray Griffin was too busy trying to bend spoons or something.

Mr. Mackey refers to himself as a US government scientist, whose work includes the production of “strike aircraft weapon systems.” This means that
his involvement in the discussion of the truth about 9/11 should be taken
with the understanding that the official story of 9/11 supports an historic
increase in military spending, and therefore benefits people who work for
the military-industrial complex.

So defense spending does not benefit people who work for the M/I complex? I'm not why you labeled this as Ad Hom if it is true. Just a simple fact is all.

 

[~enigma~]

It is not a double standard, Apollo, unless the illustrious waterboy is a member posting here.

Didn't Lyin Ryan the waterboy extraordinaire use Aquaman as a screename somewhere?

 

[JamesB]

The more I think about this, the weirder it gets. In his paper Mackey gave his full name, e-mail address, academic background, and current job. Ryan on the other hand gave nothing more than his name, but then repeatedly attacked him because some members on a forum that he mentioned in passing are anonymous. Bizarre. I am seriously starting to think this guy has some sort of mental or emotional health issue.

 

[Minadin]

So defense spending does not benefit people who work for the M/I complex? I'm not why you labeled this as Ad Hom if it is true. Just a simple fact is all.

It's an Ad Hom because it attacks the motivations of the arguer rather than his actual position (argument). Once again, you have failed to discern what an Ad Hom really is, and how it differs from an insult. Congrats.

 

[jhunter1163]

I would divulge Mrs. Jhunter1163's name and birthday, except that I've been warned that if I ever put any of her personal information on the Internet, she wouldn't make the mistake Lorena did of throwing it where the cops could find it. So, anonymous she will be.

 

[LashL]

Mr. Ryan has never attempted to contact me via e-mail, which is odd since I provide that e-mail on the cover page of my whitepaper. I don't regularly read sites that claim to be "journals," but are not.

He is incapable of direct discussion with you because he knows that he isn't fit to shine your shoes when it comes to your vastly superior knowledge of the relevant issues. Instead, he has to resort to sending a snide - and grossly inadequate - "letter" to a two-bit fake "journal".

That is pretty much standard fare for the twoof movement's brightest lights.

The last bit about his failed wrongful termination lawsuit is quite a laugh.

Indeed.

I'll get around to an update including the "critical response" in a bit. It's a busy month for me, and perhaps this is just the beginning of a new wave of comedy...

Looking forward to it!

 

[beachnut]

JamesB:

For such a serious issue as the cause of the collapse of the twin towers - a topic we claim to debate on this forum with technical precision - don't you think calling Mr. Ryan "Waterboy" is very childish and inappropriate? What point are you trying to make? Do you really think it strengthens your argument? Well let me tell you, it does not!

If you have taken the trouble to post about Mr. Ryan's writings, you obviously think he is worthy of some consideration and discussion, so please use his correct name in future. I am making this request because I was recently criticized by a moderator for the crime of miss-spelling someone's pseudonym - and I am sure the moderators wouldn't like the forum to have a double standard on this issue.

There is no mystery terrorist caused the collapse of the twin towers; if you missed that fact on 9/11 maybe you do not understand impact and fire caused the failure. Maybe you need a few systems engineering courses to understand 9/11. But the cute "water boy" name is pretty tame for a liar and the fraud Kevin is. The entire 9/11 truth movement is full of lies and is misleading others. You seem to be a veiled truther looking for the chemical signature to blame the evil government. You can debate the cause of the WTC failure all you want, you can make up names like "NISTIANs", but "water boy" is a cute name for a vile person (he may be too dumb to understand he is an idiot). You seem to be the one with name calling classification fetish.

But 9/11 was simple, cut throat, take plane, impact tower, fire, failure. The details prove this is the simple cause. It was too simple. and millions of rational people understand.

You understand gravity and the WTC final failure, but you seem to be looking for something to pin on some evil doers. For the past 6 years thousands of experts have studied the WTC and are making improvements in buildings and other areas.

Seems like the impact and fire cause, discovered by me on 9/11 will hold up long after "water boy" learns how to understand 9/11. Terrorist caused the fall of the WTC, albeit they may not of expected it, but then we still have impact and fire. The debate at JREF is on how can anyone be stupid enough to miss the real cause.

Kevin's work is not worthy of anything but mockery. Sorry, you need to get a grip, Kevin Ryan's work has zero merit. (did I miss something?)

 

[LashL]

A brief visit to Randi’s forum indicates that the participants are largely anonymous, and somewhat emotional, defenders of the official conspiracy theory. Most of their efforts appear to be focused on smearing those questioning the government’s version of 9/11, or defending that version with imaginative claims that even the government wouldn’t support. With this in mind, it’s not difficult to predict that this new work from the scientific hero of the JREF crowd is not particularly useful or informative.​

Aside from the obvious ad-hominem nature of the foregoing, this paragraph from Waterboy's "letter" also demonstrates how poor and superficial his research skills are. One can only conclude from the paragraph above that he thinks the conspiracy theories sub-forum constitutes the entirety of the JREF Forum. What a moron.​

 

[Swing Dangler]

Mr. Ryan has never attempted to contact me via e-mail, which is odd since I provide that e-mail on the cover page of my whitepaper. I don't regularly read sites that claim to be "journals," but are not.

Why should he? Did you contact him before writing your 'white paper'?

It is also untrue that I work on "strike aircraft weapon systems." I have, in the past, done work for the Joint Strike Fighter, but not on weapon systems.

Wow, Ryan I'm surprised you would offer this error as an early rebuttal.
Now did you or didn't you work on JSF which is what the DOD describes as a strike aircraft weapon systems?

The F-35 Lightning II Program (also known as the Joint Strike Fighter Program) is the Department of Defense's focal point for defining affordable next generation strike aircraft weapon systems for the Navy, Air Force, Marines, and our allies. Source: Joint Strike Fighter Website! LOL

You realize you are wrong and Kevin is right when describing the project you actually worked on!

I think now you understand why Kevin R. doesn't need to issue a 200 page rebuttal to your white paper to point out your errors.

The last bit about his failed wrongful termination lawsuit is quite a laugh. I'll leave it at that.

So why did you reference that at all in your paper? Oh yeah, a subtle character attack.

Ultimately, I think he's made a grave tactical error in issuing any reply at all, particularly one so pathetic as this one. Here's why: The JONES has now acknowledged, and even referenced, my whitepaper. They can't claim ignorance anymore. Mr. Ryan has given the impression that he's read, and indeed understood, my whitepaper. Well, if so, he has three choices:

1. Refute it properly (this won't cut it, for obvious reasons),
2. Acknowledge his errors and those of the Truth Movement, or
3. Demonstrate his total incompetence or dishonesty in maintaining his position.

I'll get around to an update including the "critical response" in a bit. It's a busy month for me, and perhaps this is just the beginning of a new wave of comedy...

Hey, you could have just typed: I'm going to dodge this response by Mr. Ryan at this time because he just made me look foolish on just a couple of points in my paper.

 

[Swing Dangler]

Aside from the obvious ad-hominem nature of the foregoing, this paragraph from Waterboy's "letter" also demonstrates how poor and superficial his research skills are. One can only conclude from the paragraph above that he thinks the conspiracy theories sub-forum constitutes the entirety of the JREF Forum. What a moron.​

LashL-He is incapable of direct discussion with you because he knows that he isn't fit to shine your shoes when it comes to your vastly superior knowledge of the relevant issues

Brainster-Maybe we could go with "Lyin' Ryan"?

Chillzero-Mod WarningEverybody, stop it now, please. This thread has become far too personalised.Please address the arguments, and do not attack the arguer. If this continues, the thread may be split, or just moved, to Abandon All Hope.

Well we have all seen many of these warnings before...so

JREF just proved this correct...

Kevin Ryan's rebuttal to Rmackey....Most of their (JREF members) efforts appear to be focused on smearing those questioning the government’s version of 9/11