The 9/11 NIST Report

[danmand]

So, now that the board trolls have wasted three entire pages attacking both the credibility of a well-known and highly published scientist, together with the open journal where a team of eight scientists and researchers chose to publish their work, maybe we can return to the actual substance of the topic, that being the actual research itself. Or is that asking too much...probably.

I find it interesting, that the same trolls, that require you to post your
credentials as a structural engineer and dismiss your opinion on that basis,
will dismiss the chemistry findings of a competent scientist without themselves having
the faintest knowledge of chemistry.

 

[Mcluhan]

I find it interesting, that the same trolls, that require you to post your
credentials as a structural engineer and dismiss your opinion on that basis,
will dismiss the chemistry findings of a competent scientist without themselves having
the faintest knowledge of chemistry.

Well said. There are two obvious trolls operating in this thread who are parasites feeding themselves, attempting to drain any positive energy produced here. Its feeds their thirst for negative recognition. Perhaps that matter needs to be dealt with before we move on. What say you?

 

[Mcluhan]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internet_troll

An Internet troll, or simply troll in Internet slang, is someone who posts controversial, inflammatory, irrelevant or off-topic messages in an online community, such as an online discussion forum or chat room, with the primary intent of provoking other users into an emotional response[1] or to generally disrupt normal on-topic discussion.

The contemporary use of the term is alleged to have first appeared on the internet in the late 1980s, but the earliest known example is from 1991.[4] It is thought to be a truncation of the phrase trolling for suckers, itself derived from the fishing technique of slowly dragging a bait through water, known as trolling.[5] The word also evokes the trolls portrayed in Scandinavian folklore and children's tales as they are often obnoxious creatures bent on mischief and wickedness. The verb "troll" originates from Old French "troller", a hunting term. The noun "troll", however, is an unrelated Old Norse word for a giant or demon.

 

[Protoss]

Well said. There are two obvious trolls operating in this thread who are parasites feeding themselves, attempting to drain any positive energy produced here. Its feeds their thirst for negative recognition. Perhaps that matter needs to be dealt with before we move on. What say you?

I would love to have a positive exchange of ideas. Forum threads that turn into verbal battle fields only serve the purpose of feeding the combatants ego. A poisoned atmosphere here deters anyone lurking who may have something important to add from participating and it has occurred to me that this may be the goal of some posters. It would be great to put this discussion in a positive direction.

Although I am leaning in pro-controlled demolition direction now I do have a concern that needs to be addressed and am interested in what others have to say about it.

Protoss

 

[Mcluhan]

I would love to have a positive exchange of ideas. Forum threads that turn into verbal battle fields only serve the purpose of feeding the combatants ego. A poisoned atmosphere here deters anyone lurking who may have something important to add from participating and it has occurred to me that this may be the goal of some posters. It would be great to put this discussion in a positive direction.

Although I am leaning in pro-controlled demolition direction now I do have a concern that needs to be addressed and am interested in what others have to say about it.

Protoss

Again well said. Perhaps we have to take this conversation elsewhere. Let me think on it. I can set up a forum myself, should we decide. It doesn't have to be public. By- invitation. Maybe that's the way to go.

 

[Mcluhan]

To add to that, I have a couple of buddies who are PEng's that i would invite. At least one of them i think would strongly align with the status quo and provide critical thinking counter weight. He is also, like me a construction guy, and he does high-rise.

 

[Asterix]

Would you like to see a sample of some stuff i found which is psych-ops related? I'm not a 100% sure the guy is not just some nut. It looks too well organized. And its got 'that voice'.

Thanks, don't bother yourself. Although if you have any psych related information on how one becomes a conspiracy theorist let me know. At the risk of seeming to be a troll in your eyes or anyone elses, I need to address my most basic concerns about any of these theories. I won't comment on the various web site information tossed about because I think anyone can attempt to justify anything by what they find on the internet. My concern is of a more practical matter. By your own admission, Mac, you acknowledge there would have to be thousands of people in the know, likely over ten thousand. And yet after nearly 8 years, nothing. We are to believe that all of these people were so morally corrupt that none of them would come forward. I'm sorry, but I just can't buy that. The truth about Watergate came to light in a matter of months. The Mafia for all the threats of omerta were brought down by the same people who were part of Murder Inc. The point is that people talk. Alot. When you dealing with a situation like Nixon or the Mafia it was at least kept to a minimum, and it still unraveled. Nobody can keep a secret this big this long. I understand that there is a certain attraction in wanting to believe this. I can't.

 

[danmand]

At the risk of seeming to be a troll in your eyes of anyone elses, I need to address my most basic concerns about any of these theories. I won't comment on the various web site information tossed about because I think anyone can attempt to justify anything by what they find on the internet. My concern is of a more practical matter. By your own admission, Mac, you acknowledge there would have to be thousands of people in the know, likely over ten thousand. And yet after nearly 8 years, nothing. We are to believe that all of these people were so morally corrupt that none of them would come forward. I'm sorry, but I just can't buy that. The truth about Watergate came to light in a matter of months. The Mafia for all the threats of omerta were brought down by the same people who were part of Murder Inc. The point is that people talk. Alot. When you dealing with a situation like Nixon or the Mafia it was at least kept to a minimum, and it still unraveled. Nobody can keep a secret this big this long. I understand that there is a certain attraction is wanting to believe this. I can't.

Your point is a valid one, and you are not a troll by raising it. I will repeat here what I posted in another thread:

I have no agenda, and I have no wish to proselyte.

I found it surprising and newsworthy that a competent chemistry professor at the University of Copenhagen
found evidence of nano-thermitic particles in the dust from 9/11.
I believe it is the only analysis of 9/11 dust. Surely, others will follow, and the evidence will be proven or refuted.
That is how science works. Maybe some evil person salted the dust with nano-thermitic particles before the
danish professor got his hands on it (as in BreX). My point is that this is factual data, and it is either repeatable
or not. No government, organization or conspiracy can make apples fall upwards. If there is nono-thermitic particles
in the dust from 9/11, it will be proven. If not, it will be disproved.

 

[Mcluhan]

Thanks, don't bother yourself. Although if you have any psych related information on how one becomes a conspiracy theorist let me know. At the risk of seeming to be a troll in your eyes of anyone elses, I need to address my most basic concerns about any of these theories. I won't comment on the various web site information tossed about because I think anyone can attempt to justify anything by what they find on the internet. My concern is of a more practical matter. By your own admission, Mac, you acknowledge there would have to be thousands of people in the know, likely over ten thousand. And yet after nearly 8 years, nothing. We are to believe that all of these people were so morally corrupt that none of them would come forward. I'm sorry, but I just can't buy that. The truth about Watergate came to light in a matter of months. The Mafia for all the threats of omerta were brought down by the same people who were part of Murder Inc. The point is that people talk. Alot. When you dealing with a situation like Nixon or the Mafia it was at least kept to a minimum, and it still unraveled. Nobody can keep a secret this big this long. I understand that there is a certain attraction is wanting to believe this. I can't.

Thanks, don't bother yourself. Although if you have any psych related information on how one becomes a conspiracy theorist let me know.

Asterix, now that was a low blow, but I'll absorb the hit and channel it positively.

At the risk of seeming to be a troll in your eyes of anyone elses,

Asterix my friend, I'm sure you know I, nor anyone else does not see you as a troll. Far from it. Again, I'll absorb the negative swipe and channel it positively.

I need to address my most basic concerns about any of these theories. I won't comment on the various web site information tossed about because I think anyone can attempt to justify anything by what they find on the internet.

Asterix, the Internet has it all.

My concern is of a more practical matter. By your own admission, Mac, you acknowledge there would have to be thousands of people in the know, likely over ten thousand. And yet after nearly 8 years, nothing.


Asterix, I personally believe its in the 500,000 to 1,000,000 IN THE KNOW! Its the whole Intelligence community world-wide. (and their mistresses)
As far as people who see it for what it is, I would go along with what Neil's Harrit said.


We are to believe that all of these people were so morally corrupt that none of them would come forward. I'm sorry, but I just can't buy that.

Asterix, there are better explanations.

The truth about Watergate came to light in a matter of months. The Mafia for all the threats of omerata were brought down by the same people who were part of Murder Inc. The point is that people talk. Alot. When you dealing with a situation like Nixon or the Mafia it was at least kept to a minimum, and it still unraveled.

Asterix, Nixon was hung out to dry.

Nobody can keep a secret this big this long. I understand that there is a certain attraction is wanting to believe this. I can't.

Asterix, its not anything like that. Its two realities. I have a book somewhere here on that subject, going back 30 years. I'll look for it and try to answer better later.

 

[Asterix]

Asterix, the Internet has it all.

So does my local garbage dump.

 

[Mcluhan]

So does my local garbage dump.

Noted...

 

[fuji]

I find it interesting, that the same trolls, that require you to post your credentials as a structural engineer and dismiss your opinion on that basis, will dismiss the chemistry findings of a competent scientist without themselves having the faintest knowledge of chemistry.

I find it interesting that you are too ignorant to grasp the concept of "peer review" and even more interesting that you aren't man enough to admit you made a mistake by linking to a fake journal.

I am sure when you first posted that link you were unaware of that the journal had fallen into "bad hands" but it is a sign of intellectual honesty to be able to admit the truth when it up and slaps you across the face.

You are dishonest, Danmand. Very intellectually dishonest.

 

[fuji]

What part of "fake journal" do you guys not understand?

I am sure this Niels dude did some competent work earlier in his career to earn his position as associate professor. He has apparently now has a political axe to grind and he has allowed that to bias his work.

That is why he can't get this particular paper, or anything like it, published in a peer review journal: It is bunk pseudo-science.

The only "journal" that would touch it is a fake journal run by a Pakistani guy who hates the United States, who has purchesed the remnants of a formerly legitimate publisher out of bankruptcy, and is using that as a vehicle to spred propaganada.

However we really don't need to go over that again, what everyone should agree to unless they are a complete ignoramus is this:

You have to provide a reference to an article in a proper peer reviewed journal or else you have not got a source.

Good scientists can publish bad work when they are as politically biased as this Niels dude obviously is--whatever he may have done years ago he has dedicated his life for the past few years to conspiracy theory, and appears to have a political axe to grind.

 

[Mcluhan]

I personally have never known Danmand to be intellectually dishonest. In my 4 or 5 years posting here.

 

[Mcluhan]

I have also not once seen Danmand, or any other poster for that matter at any time except one, threaten to ridicule other posters, read that again THREATEN other posters in future if they did not support his point of view. Usually that's an automatic ban.

 

[dcbogey]

Again well said. Perhaps we have to take this conversation elsewhere. Let me think on it. I can set up a forum myself, should we decide. It doesn't have to be public. By- invitation. Maybe that's the way to go.

I've read this entire thread and I must say I'm a skeptic, of both sides. But to take this "by-invitation" imho would be a mistake.

 

[Omnius]

I had to reply.
First off... there are no trolls here. No one is trolling. If you vehemently disagree with, and cannot tolerate, the opinions someone posts ... then you are a closed minded bigot. To Paraphrase an earlier post: An Internet troll... is someone who posts controversial, inflammatory, irrelevant or off-topic messages in an online community... with the primary intent of provoking other users into an emotional response or to ... disrupt normal on-topic discussion. No comment was irrelevant, nor controversial (in fact, the ORIGINAL POST may be considered the controversial one). If you are gonna call each other names, then at least be more original than the old standby TROLL TROLL TROLL.

Anyway... re: the journal and need for peer review. The whole point, is that these findings have NOT been peer reviewed... nor been independently tested and replicated. WHY IS THIS IMPORTANT, you say???

WELL THEN... 2 words... (no.. not Bre-X LOL).... COLD FUSION. Yup... those studies WERE published in "real" journals [and this latest scientist is from Purdue (yes.. the real and very credible Purdue University)]... and the advantage is.. that scientific review panels and peers jumped all over the findings to try and replicate it. When the journal is obscure or weak or shady.. then there is no review panel and credible scientists DONT read it. AND PLEEEEZ... I dont care if Niels Whatshisname is credible or not... the fact he couldnt or didnt want to publish in a "real" journal speaks volumes. Either the real journals found his work lacking.. or he fears the light of true scientific inquiry. OR most likely... thought that if this can get to press before the real scientists sniff out his work... then he becomes Mr Celebrity for a few days or even weeks. And in the right circles... he will make a killing in the talk show circuit on late night talk radio and obscure symposia with topics like "My Mother was an alien and I have proof", "3 easy steps to a perpetual machine", "Cold fusion in a bottle" and "George Bush is a Android" (ok.. maybe that last one is true??!?! LOL).

If you wanna convince me... get other scientists to replicate that study, and show me the OPPOSITE conclusions too, for there are ALWAYS opposite viewpoints and counter-arguments. Then.. let me choose. But to blindly follow some quack and his cabal of lackeys, without further proof other than some other guys who swear they witnessed aliens crossbreading the Loch Ness monster with Sasquatch. well.. I think you can smell my disdain already.

For crying out loud... even the crazy creationists now have a scientific sounding theory with their very own "journals", "scientists", and "experts", all saying that "intelligent design" is a true, viable, scientific concept. And some here would probably be first in line to throw stones into THAT setup. Then why prop up the VERY flimsy evidence that currently exists within the 9-11 conspiracy community. (and.. as a concession... i did say currently exists... because a true scientist never really closes his mind, and rather lets all the evidence speak... even if the evidence walks in late to the party).

Signed,
Prof. Omnius Emeritus,
Frankenburg University: International Department In Otherworldly Theoretical Sciences
Universitee Paris: Yeoman Of Underlying Research Studies

 

[fuji]

I personally have never known Danmand to be intellectually dishonest. In my 4 or 5 years posting here.

Well now you do. He posted a fake journal, I suspect without realizing that it was fake, but then when he was shown that it was fake instead of retracting he launched into personal attacks. That is intellectually dishonest.

So you can no longer say that you have never known Danmand to be intellectually dishonest.

 

[danmand]

Anyway... re: the journal and need for peer review. The whole point, is that these findings have NOT been peer reviewed... nor been independently tested and replicated. WHY IS THIS IMPORTANT, you say???

My understanding is that the chemistry findings have been peer reviewed.

WELL THEN... 2 words... (no.. not Bre-X LOL).... COLD FUSION. Yup... those studies WERE published in "real" journals [and this latest scientist is from Purdue (yes.. the real and very credible Purdue University)]... and the advantage is.. that scientific review panels and peers jumped all over the findings to try and replicate it. When the journal is obscure or weak or shady.. then there is no review panel and credible scientists DONT read it. AND PLEEEEZ... I dont care if Niels Whatshisname is credible or not... the fact he couldnt or didnt want to publish in a "real" journal speaks volumes. Either the real journals found his work lacking.. or he fears the light of true scientific inquiry. OR most likely... thought that if this can get to press before the real scientists sniff out his work... then he becomes Mr Celebrity for a few days or even weeks. And in the right circles... he will make a killing in the talk show circuit on late night talk radio and obscure symposia with topics like "My Mother was an alien and I have proof", "3 easy steps to a perpetual machine", "Cold fusion in a bottle" and "George Bush is a Android" (ok.. maybe that last one is true??!?! LOL).

If you wanna convince me... get other scientists to replicate that study, and show me the OPPOSITE conclusions too, for there are ALWAYS opposite viewpoints and counter-arguments. Then.. let me choose. But to blindly follow some quack and his cabal of lackeys, without further proof other than some other guys who swear they witnessed aliens crossbreading the Loch Ness monster with Sasquatch. well.. I think you can smell my disdain already.

For crying out loud... even the crazy creationists now have a scientific sounding theory with their very own "journals", "scientists", and "experts", all saying that "intelligent design" is a true, viable, scientific concept. And some here would probably be first in line to throw stones into THAT setup. Then why prop up the VERY flimsy evidence that currently exists within the 9-11 conspiracy community. (and.. as a concession... i did say currently exists... because a true scientist never really closes his mind, and rather lets all the evidence speak... even if the evidence walks in late to the party).

Your point about cold fusion is a good one, and I was thinking of using the analogy in my
own posting, besides Bre-X. I don't think we disagree on the science. Here is what I posted:

I found it surprising and newsworthy that a competent chemistry professor at the University of Copenhagen
found evidence of nano-thermitic particles in the dust from 9/11.
I believe it is the only analysis of 9/11 dust. Surely, others will follow, and the evidence will be proven or refuted.
That is how science works. Maybe some evil person salted the dust with nano-thermitic particles before the
danish professor got his hands on it (as in BreX). My point is that this is factual data, and it is either repeatable
or not. No government, organization or conspiracy can make apples fall upwards. If there is nono-thermitic particles
in the dust from 9/11, it will be proven. If not, it will be disproved.

We both want other scientists to analyze the dust from 9/11 and either confirm
or refute the presence of nano-thermite in the dust. Maybe other scientists
will be unable to find the nano-thermite and we have another cold fusion case.
Or they will find it, and we have to find an explanation why it is there.

Finally, I don't care if the scientist is pakistani, danish or israeli. It does not matter to me.
Either the data is repeatable or it is not. That is what matters.

And it matters not one bit, if I or others here believe the initial paper or not. Surely, others
will analyze the 9/11 dust, and the scientific community will decide on the presence or
absence of nano-thermite. It is not a matter of religion or politics.
Ergo, there is no reason to get anybodys shorts in knots over it.

Hoeever, I think it is newsworthy.

 

[Omnius]

We both want other scientists to analyze the dust from 9/11 and either confirm or refute the presence of nano-thermite in the dust. Maybe other scientists will be unable to find the nano-thermite and we have another cold fusion case. Or they will find it, and we have to find an explanation why it is there.

EXACTLY.

Another point about the number of conspirators that would have to be involved (from tens of thousands to even a million people) that was stated earlier CANNOT be ignored. There is NO WAY a million people can shut up about this... even upon pain of death (see example of omerta and mafia). oh hell.. look at Jerry Springer and Maury Povitch... hell these people cant even shut about about their affairs.. they have to tell their SO about it. People cannot hold secrets. And the bigger the secret and the more the people involved would make this conspiracy all but impossible.