Home

Steven Jones is...

gretavo's picture
Submitted by gretavo on Thu, 2010-02-25 21:04.
...eccentric but fundamentally honest.
59% (20 votes)
...working to deliberately thwart the truth movement.
15% (5 votes)
...batshit insane.
26% (9 votes)
Total votes: 34
»

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
juandelacruz's picture

Jones still looks good in

Submitted by juandelacruz on Mon, 2010-03-01 02:51.

Jones still looks good in this poll. I do wish other truth advocates would retest his samples or other samples to independently verify his findings of nano thermite. On top of that someone should test for conventional explosives as well.

On the whole however I give him the benefit of doubt to be an honest man.

»
kate of the kiosk's picture

yeah..he's come so far

Submitted by kate of the kiosk on Mon, 2010-03-01 03:49.

and so have we to seriously put him in some cointelpro suit. if he goes, so do the rest, and i cannot believe that there would not be a good theologian, physicist, and engineer out there slugging away~~~

if not them then who?

»
kate of the kiosk's picture

i miss Lazlo!

Submitted by kate of the kiosk on Mon, 2010-03-01 03:50.

so sorry he was in the midst of loss when we lost him.

»
Annoymouse's picture

FTR -

Submitted by Annoymouse on Tue, 2010-03-02 08:15.

There are at least two independent labs running tests on the dust samples in order to verify (or not) the findings of Dr. Jones, et al.

Note that these scientists are not connected to the 9/11 truth movement in any way and they plan on publishing their results in peer reviewed journals (which can sometimes take way too long, but that's just the way it is).

Dr. Jones told me this about a year ago so I expect these papers will be published sometime in 2010 or early 2011.

As far as testing for more conventional explosive residues, I will see what I can find out on this as it is a legitimate question and we deserve an answer. However, it is quite likely that the different formulas of nanothermite were sufficient to produce the observed results (i.e. explosive and incendiary formulas).

The truth shall set us free. Love is the only way forward.

»
LeftWright's picture

BTW -

Submitted by LeftWright on Wed, 2010-03-03 11:48.

That was me, it was late and I didn't realize that I wasn't logged in until after I submitted the comment.

Just to set the record straight.

The truth shall set us free. Love is the only way forward.

»
juandelacruz's picture

Thanks LeftWright, That's

Submitted by juandelacruz on Wed, 2010-03-03 14:03.

Thanks LeftWright,

That's great news! I just hope this testing is done transparently with good documentation that covers the sample collection, chain of custody and testing.

The rationale to test for conventional explosives is so self evident that I cannot think of any reason not to do it, except if we fear the results. But what have we really got to lose. Whatever the cause of the WTC7 going down, it could not have been office fires.

»
gretavo's picture

right on

Submitted by gretavo on Wed, 2010-03-03 14:47.

but at this point we cannot assume any test performed by ANYONE is 100% credible, since there is not yet mass awareness of the sort that would make the conseuqences of falsifying results a bad idea...

»
gretavo's picture

in the interest of full disclosure

Submitted by gretavo on Wed, 2010-03-03 14:50.

these poll results are not scientific. registered users can vote twice (as their registered identity and as anonymous), and I can go in and edit the poll results any time I want. I don't of course, but if you're going to suspect me of doing it you'll pretty much have to acknowledge that ANY poll conducted by ANYONE can be very easily falsified.

»