It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Jones "Peer - Reviewed" Scientific Journal Found Credible!

page: 26
96
<< 23  24  25   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Oct, 9 2011 @ 10:29 PM
link   

Originally posted by impressme
reply to post by DrEugeneFixer
You know as well as most people know in signing A&E petition that most of these experts found in the WTC dust samples.


That is the lie you have been repeating over and over, in an attempted appeal to authority. You have not presented a shred of evidence that the petition signers support Steven E. Jones, or the Thermite theory or that the signers are knowledgeable in the relevant disciplines to evaluate the paper. If neither of these is the case, then you should revise the OP.

So please present some actual evidence that the petition signers "have accepted Jones peered reviewed paper as evidence of explosive particles".




posted on Oct, 10 2011 @ 02:11 AM
link   
reply to post by DrEugeneFixer
 


That is the lie you have been repeating over and over, in an attempted appeal to authority. You have not presented a shred of evidence that the petition signers support Steven E. Jones, or the Thermite theory or that the signers are knowledgeable in the relevant disciplines to evaluate the paper. If neither of these is the case, then you should revise the OP.


You have called me a liar not just once, but twice (ATS T&C no name calling accepted!)

Prove I have lied?
I appeal to what authority?


Here let’s twist your question around a bit, can you prove that the signers of the petition are not knowledgeable of Jones peer reviewed accepted science? Your question is redundant. Perhaps you should revisit my OP; it has nothing to do with your line of ridiculous questions.


So please present some actual evidence that the petition signers "have accepted Jones peered reviewed paper as evidence of explosive particles".


Please present some actual evidence that the petition signers "have “NOT ACCEPTED” Jones peered reviewed paper as evidence of explosive particles?

Do you have evidence that all these people who signed A&E petition do not accept Jones Science? No you don’t! As I don’t have any proof that all the signers accepted Jones peer reviewed science, however A&E has embraced Jones’ science and it is being used as evidence, so you can play your prove it game on every word I say, you can spin the questions anyway you like, it only makes you look juvenile. You have a nice day.
edit on 10-10-2011 by impressme because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 10 2011 @ 04:34 AM
link   

Originally posted by impressme

You have called me a liar not just once, but twice (ATS T&C no name calling accepted!)


You'll note that I did not engage in name calling. I asserted that statements you were making were lies. I concede that you may be making false statements in error, or out of ignorance.


Originally posted by impressme
Prove I have lied?


I think it has been well demonstrated that you have no evidence for the claim that the AE911 Truth petition signers support the Steven Jones authored papers concerning thermite, which you claimed in the first paragraph of your original post. Nor have you shown why we should accept the petition signers' evaluation of a chemistry journal article, considering that virtually none of them are chemists.


Originally posted by impressme
I appeal to what authority?



Your first paragraph asserts "...1,398 “Valid” signers put their name on a list in support of Steven Jones scientific Journal and support it 100%? These are scientists, Architects, Engineers, and professionals." That is a classic appeal to authority. We are supposed to find Jones' writings credible because it is endorsed by 'scientists, Architects, Engineers and professionals'. This is a classic appeal to authority. In this case it is very misplaced, since the experts in question are not competent to evaluate the work.


Originally posted by impressme
Here let’s twist your question around a bit, can you prove that the signers of the petition are not knowledgeable of Jones peer reviewed accepted science? ......

Please present some actual evidence that the petition signers "have “NOT ACCEPTED” Jones peered reviewed paper as evidence of explosive particles?

Do you have evidence that all these people who signed A&E petition do not accept Jones Science? No you don’t!


First, it's impossible to prove a negative, and second, I have no access to the signers mental states, third, I never made that claim, so no, I can't prove that the signers all reject Jones' 'science'.


Originally posted by impressme
As I don’t have any proof that all the signers accepted Jones peer reviewed science,


That's all I was trying to point out. Thank you.


Originally posted by impressme
You have a nice day.


I shall. You have my permission to do the same.



posted on Oct, 10 2011 @ 02:16 PM
link   
reply to post by DrEugeneFixer
 



First, it's impossible to prove a negative, and second, I have no access to the signers mental states, third, I never made that claim, so no, I can't prove that the signers all reject Jones' 'science'.


Thank you, which was my point.


Originally posted by impressme
As I don’t have any proof that all the signers accepted Jones peer reviewed science,
That's all I was trying to point out. Thank you.


No, you were hoping that you could discredit me and my OP, your offensiveness speaks for itself.



posted on Oct, 10 2011 @ 02:56 PM
link   
reply to post by impressme
 


Go ahead and provide some actual evidence if you want.

Asking someone to prove the opposite of your claim is typically the last phase of desperation before a fallacious argument collapses in the face of evidence.

I'l go ahead and make a claim of my own now.

The signers of the AE911TRUTH petition have made no public endorsement of the work of Dr. Steven Jones. Furthermore, even if they had, they are primarily licensed and non-licensed people who work in architecture and engineering offices. There is no indication they have any competence to evaluate the work of Dr. Jones concerning chemical analysis of a sample of dust.

Your original post gave priority to a false claim. This...


1,398 “Valid” signers put their name on a list in support of Steven Jones scientific Journal and support it 100%? These are scientists, Architects, Engineers, and professionals.
was literally in the first paragraph. Now thanks to my efforts you've admitted that you don't have evidence that it is true. We are making progress.

Now, as to your claim that I am offensive and immature, I'd like to point out that all I have done is to attempt to bring one false claim to light for the benefit of people reading your thread. You should thank me for making your OP better, by clearing out irrelevant and false information!



posted on Oct, 10 2011 @ 03:33 PM
link   
reply to post by neformore
 
because contrary to poplular opinion not all people have the guts to stand up for the truth.These few architects and engineers are the unsung hero's in this story for standing up and saying no it didn't happen that way,and god bless for doing it.

If the government wasn't compliant in 911,why in the history of investigating accidents did they for the first time in recent memory destroy and ignore evidence?This is a sad situation and a shame that the government can so easily lie to the people....divide and conquer.



posted on Oct, 10 2011 @ 04:16 PM
link   
reply to post by DrEugeneFixer
 



Your original post gave priority to a false claim.


There was no false claim, it is your “opinion” it was because you chose to believe such.
Your game is getting the last word in desperately trying to discrediting OP in hoping that the readers take your side. Good luck.



posted on Oct, 10 2011 @ 11:28 PM
link   

Originally posted by impressme
reply to post by DrEugeneFixer
 



Your original post gave priority to a false claim.


There was no false claim,


Then justify it.



new topics

top topics



 
96
<< 23  24  25   >>

log in

join