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.
Surely then, the question is - if the idea is correct - why there aren't more who back it?
Originally posted by impressme
reply to post by neformore
Surely then, the question is - if the idea is correct - why there aren't more who back it?
Perhaps, because most of these engineers have families to feed and bills to pay and are not going to risk their careers perhaps they do not want to rock the boat.
Perspective.
TheInstitution of Civil Engineers (UK) has 84,350 members
The Institution of Structural Engineers (uk) has over 23,000 members
The American Society of Civil Engineers has over 140,000 members
Working that out, based on the major institutions of two countries, thats 0.5% of engineers.
But not all of the signatories are Engineers, some are architects. The pool of architects from those two countries would dilute the pot even more. (The American Institute of Architects has 83.500+ members)
Surely then, the question is - if the idea is correct - why there aren't more who back it?
Sure, 1398 sounds like a huge figure, but out of how many worldwide?
Originally posted by turbofan
My thoughts are with you and also in the few threads I have debating the resident "experts".
Nobody will touch Jones' paper because they know they can't deal with the science. If they do, they
will admit by science that 9/11 was an inside job.
One piece of art by a Jim Lecce in New York: www.nationalartsclub.org...
Originally posted by impressme
Just because not very many professionals signed on, it doesn’t prove Jones science is flawed.
Years later she claims to send some of that dust to another conspiracy theorist, who isn't even a chemist, and was trying to come up with a way to get people to buy into his pre-determined conclusion that thermite took down the towers.
A bunch of conspiracy theorists , many of whom belong to a website that happens to make it's money on keeping the conspiracy theory alive, agree with his findings.
Originally posted by bsbray11
His resume is huge and stamping him with the label "conspiracy theorist" and brushing everything else he says or does aside based on that is immature and unreasonable.
The reason he didn't test in the absence of air could be because he understands a few things about what exactly that would or wouldn't prove, than you do.
Originally posted by neformore
Originally posted by impressme
Just because not very many professionals signed on, it doesn’t prove Jones science is flawed.
It doesn't mean its right either does it?
Originally posted by impressme
How would Janette MacKinlay or a scientist know that na-nothermite was in the WTC dust samples before testing it?
On September 22, 2005 Jones presented his views on the collapse of the World Trade Center towers and World Trade Center 7 at a BYU seminar attended by about 60 people. Pointing to the speed and symmetry of the collapses, the characteristics of dust jets, eyewitness reports of explosions down low in the buildings, partially vaporized beams, molten metal in the basements which was still red hot weeks after the event, and the notion that no modern high rise had ever collapsed from fire, Jones suggested that the evidence defies the mainstream collapse theory and favors controlled demolition, possibly by the use of thermite or nanothermite.
You are trying your best to twist garbage nonsense into something that’s not true.
Originally posted by Soloist
Originally posted by bsbray11
His resume is huge and stamping him with the label "conspiracy theorist" and brushing everything else he says or does aside based on that is immature and unreasonable.
So, you're a fan of his I take it?
Unreasonable is taking a non scientific sample and sending it to a conspiracy theorist who is trying to prove his pre-determined conclusion, then expect people who aren't conspiracy theorists to accept that.
If you ever want anyone to take this matter seriously then get an independent team of scientists to procure several samples
The reason he didn't test in the absence of air could be because he understands a few things about what exactly that would or wouldn't prove, than you do.
Wow, prime example of what I just said above. Until the proper tests are run, there is no proof. Period.
Originally posted by Mythkiller
Irrefutable evidence as far as I can see, nice post.
I would suggest that the only ones that are debunking this information at this stage are paid agents/stooges, trolls, complete morons, ignorant or just in total denial.
Personaly, I feel they are mostly agents of one sort or another being paid or otherwise to muddy the waters and cause doubt, or try to instill confusion intothe arguement...actually it's not even an arguement any more, it's gone way beyond any reasonable doubt.
Lets see who arrives to do the aforementionededit on 28-12-2010 by Mythkiller because: Spellingedit on 28-12-2010 by Mythkiller because: (no reason given)