More Steven Jones/Fake Truther Discord on Display at 911Blogger
From open literature
http://www.wired.com/wiredscience/2008/06/ top-5-ways-that/
• Top 5 Ways to Cause a Man-Made Earthquake By Alexis Madrigal June 4, 2008
• “...It turns out, actually, that the human production of earthquakes
is... downright commonplace: Klose estimates that 25 percent of
Britain’s recorded seismic events were caused by people.”
New
York
Times,
June
24,
2009, excerpts:
“Deep in Bedrock, Clean Energy and Quake Fears By JAMES GLANZBASEL, Switzerland
Markus O. H?ing, a former oilman, was a hero in this city of medieval
cathedrals and intense environmental passion three years ago, all
because he had drilled a hole three miles deep near the corner of
Neuhaus Street and Shafer Lane.
He was prospecting for a vast source of clean, renewable energy...: the
heat simmering within the earth’s bedrock. All seemed to be going well
until Dec. 8, 2006, when the project set off an earthquake, shaking and
damaging buildings and terrifying many...Hastily shut down, Mr. Haring’s
project was soon forgotten by nearly everyone outside Switzerland. As
early as this week, though, an American start-up company, AltaRock
Energy, will begin using nearly the same method to drill deep into
ground laced with fault lines in an area two hours drive north of San
Francisco.
AltaRock maintains that it will steer clear of large faults and that it
can operate safely.But in a report on seismic impact that AltaRock was
required to file, the company failed to mention that the Basel program
was shut down because of the earthquake it caused. AltaRock claimed it
was uncertain that the project had caused the quake, even though Swiss
government seismologists and officials on the Basel project agreed that
it did. Nor did AltaRock mention the thousands of smaller earthquakes
induced by the Basel project that continued for months after it shut
down.
... Mr. Haring knew that by its very nature, the technique created earthquakes...
The high-pressure water can be thought of loosely as a lubricant that
makes it easier for those forces to slide the earth along the weak
points, creating a web or network of fractures....what surprised him
that afternoon was the intensity of the quakes.
...“In the United States, ... the Basel earthquakes received little news coverage...”
-- New York Times, 29 June 2009
- Login to post comments
- 1 vote
Water injection has also caused large earthquakes
But this cannot be done quickly or covertly, so it is not a useful method of triggering covert earthquakes.
It can result in major lawsuits, though, and has on more than one occasion.
We have two basic problems here...people who don't understand how
basic research is done and activists who are so worried about
credibility and public relations that they trample over an individual's
right to pursue their own interests. [edited for emphasis]
Btw, my oldest brother is an EE and is going to look into the
overunity device and may be interested in testing one, I'll let you
know.
I hope that you and yours are well.
Thanks for all your great work and your indefatigable nature!
All the best!
John
- Login to post comments
- -2 votes
Your moderation is biased in
Your moderation is biased in favor of Dr. Jones position. Don't compromise your neutral position as moderator
- Login to post comments
- 3 votes
Please explain
How is my moderation biased in favor of Dr. Jones?
FTR - I have done NO moderating on this blog. I'm just commenting like everyone else...
Another example of your reasoning skills?
Look, I get it, you and others are worried about CREDIBILITY.
I'm more concerned with people trampling all over someone's right to pursue their own research interests.
That fact is earthquakes (small ones, anyway) ARE induced for seismic surveys.
The fact is we DON"T know everything about the cosmos we live in, so there could very well be untapped energy sources out there.
Lighten up and give it a rest, PLEASE.
I hope that you and yours are well.
- Login to post comments
- 1 vote
911 blogger is not a FORUM
911 blogger is not a FORUM FOR PEOPLE TO PUSH
THEIR PRIVATE RESEARCH INTERESTS! Is it? And this is questionable
research that discredits us. Not everything that you have a right to do
is something that you ought to do. He has a right to explore anything he
wants including reptiles from outerspace or whatever is in vogue right
now. What does that have to do with 911? If this is a forum for people
to try and discuss issues of relevance to 911 truth and to educate the
general public about our cause then this is inappropriate. Finally, do
you have a problem with my reasoning skills? Why don't you make a real
argument that I can respond to and then we'll see what's up with my
reasoning skills.
- Login to post comments
- 2 votes
Vulich -
Who is pushing anything?
This was a simple update about what Dr. Jones has found to date regarding some of his research.
It is relevant to this site as long as Dr. Jones remains relevant to 9/11 truth.
Are you saying he is no longer relevant?
Btw, a moderator other than me posted this blog.
I am only commenting here as any other site user would.
I think you and others are massively over-reacting here, but that is your right.
I have no interest in arguing with you about your reasoning skills,
they are quite clear to anyone who can read English and think
critically.
The truth shall set us free, but who knows where the truth will ultimately lead.
Love is the only way forward, and love means accepting the truth, no matter what it is.
- Login to post comments
- 1 vote
.
so i can post my new research on reptilian people on Blogger now?
- Login to post comments
- -1 votes
You're free to try,
but I doubt any of the moderators would post it.
Can you show its relevance to the events of 9/11/01?
Somehow I think you can find better uses for your time, yes?
Are you also implying that you are as relevant to the 9/11 truth movement as Dr. Jones is at this particular moment in time?
I hope that you and yours are well.
- Login to post comments
- 0 votes
Was that an answer?
There are three questions there, so specificity will greatly enhance clarity.
- Login to post comments
- 0 votes
Sure
Question #1: Can you
Sure
Question #1: Can you show its relevance to the events of 9/11/01?
Answer #1: not directly - but if my initial experiments prove to be
correct - and my Radio Shack credit card holds up - i may actually be
able to save humanity. think what credibility i will bring to 9/11
Truth then!
Question #2: Somehow I think you can find better uses for your time, yes?
Answer #2: what could be more important than revealing these
slime balls LeftWright? i mean - reptilian people!!! in our
midst!! posing like regular people!!! (wink wink) we gotta root them
out and wack the shit outta them!!
Question #3: Are you also implying that you are as relevant to the
9/11 truth movement as Dr. Jones is at this particular moment in time?
Answer #3: i think the correct answer to this question is: YO MAMMA!!
(ding ding ding) Yes! The judges will accept that anwer!! YO MAMMA - LEFTWRIGHT!!! YO MAMMA!!!
- Login to post comments
- 0 votes
As always,
your east coast sense of humor is greatly appreciated.
What kind of "reptilian people" are these and, most importantly, are they carnivores?
Cheers!
- Login to post comments
- 2 votes
My sources,
who are highly placed, say that they often
engage in sexual orgies concurrent with astrological phenomena. The
blood of gentiles is often imbibed, so of course they are carnivores.
Whats really great is that we do have an A-list celebrity about to
come out in support of this information, and I can tell you for a fact
that it will shake Hollywood to its core!! We hope to get some DVDs
together to help fund our efforts to get the truth out. It'll explain everything.
- Login to post comments
- 3 votes
I CANT WAIT
I've seen some of the data. John is really on
to something here, and it would really be in the truth movements
interests maybe not to push this info, but at least give everyone a
heads up about this exciting new development!
- Login to post comments
- 4 votes
The question of relevance
is an important one; shouldn't we be less
tolerant of fringe associations the more relevant somebody seen as a
9/11 Truth leader is?
The more relevant a leader, the more damaging a blow to his
credibility would be to the movement he's seen to be one of the leaders
of.
- Login to post comments
- 2 votes
Wrong.
"Love is the only way forward, and love means accepting the truth, no matter what it is."
You demonstrate clearly to me and others here that you are not at all
savvy about movement strategy. You don't know what the truth is and so
you have no way to accept it. This isn't a pleasant disagreement about
opinion. You are ignorant and need to learn better. And frankly, I'm not
going to press you to do some reading about social movements or find
out more about movement history. If you respect truth and this movement,
you would.
You ARE a promoter of the 'big tent.' Period. And that means that you
damage the movement. You hurt 9/11 truth. That's truth that you don't
appear likely to accept any time soon and I am now being vocal about the
fact that you are a liability to this site.
"I hope that you and yours are well."
Don't ever say that plastic crap about me and my family or my issues
with you will be personal as well. I don't buy your crunchy BS for a
second and find it totally insulting.
- Login to post comments
- 0 votes
Movement strategy?
That has to be the funniest thing I've heard since I started working with the so-called organized 9/11 truth movement.
What movement strategy?
Please enlighten us, oh learned Jules.
As for my sincere "crunchy BS" I will call your veiled FOAD and ask
you to sit down and discuss it civilly the next time we are near each
other.
As for tents, I have a small tube tent, which allows me to move about
freely and talk to anyone I choose, especially those I disagree with,
as that's the only way you can come to any kind of understanding.
I assure you that I will still be here when you are done burning the
village down to save it. I'll be very easy to find as I will be one of
the first ones starting to rebuild it.
Cheers!
- Login to post comments
- 1 vote
Wrong answer
"That has to be the funniest thing I've heard since I started working with the so-called organized 9/11 truth movement."
Funny? I wonder if anyone else thinks my concerns about credibility are funny.
I didn't tell you to "Fuck Off And Die" and I won't be associating with you in any way.
I will be lobbying to have you removed as a moderator of this site.
- Login to post comments
- 1 vote
How important is credibility
How important is credibility to you LeftWright?
Do you think that these are legitimate research projects? What is your
reaction to the claim that these research projects are without
scientific basis?
- Login to post comments
- 6 votes
Interesting goal
LeftWright said.."or is your strategy all about gaining credibility with the msm?" "That's even funnier."
So your stated goal is to make sure you are part of a fringe kook movement?
- Login to post comments
- 0 votes
No
I realized long ago that the day the msm takes
this issue seriously and reports honestly is the day most of us can go
back to what we were doing before we got involved in this.
I'm a realist as well as an idealist.
What we need to be doing, and are doing pretty well, is educate the
public, AND none of these issues about Dr. Jones research impact that in
ANY significant way, imo.
I freely admit I may be wrong about that, but you're going to have to
provide concrete evidence, not just conjecture and supposition.
One of the strategies that has evolved organically within this movement is bypassing the msm and going direct to the public.
All this hand-wringing about credibility in this case reminds me of
parents who worry what their neighbors will think if their child turns
about to be gay BEFORE he has even been born.
FTR - I always make sure what I present and how I present it is
credible when I deal with the public. That's what really matters.
Now, if you were to ask me if this adds fuel to the fire for our critics...of course it does.
If you were to ask me if I think Dr. Jones should have done this in a much less visible manner, the clear answer is yes.
But if you are asking me to condemn someone I have respect for and
like because he chooses to do some research into some areas he finds
interesting, the answer is no. Dr. Jones is working a bit out of his
field with the induced earthquakes, but he's a smart guy and can get up
to speed pretty fast and when (and if ) he has something ready to be
reviewed by professionals in the field I will be very interested to see
what they have to say (I've known earth scientists my whole life, so
this is something I happen to be quite interested in).
What I see here are a few people who are so concerned with some
mythical credibility (with who again?), that they lose sight of the big
picture and are ready to throw anyone under a bus when they say or do
something they don't agree with. This is not a road I want to go down
(Pol Pot, anyone?).
FTR - My goal is to help spark a non-violent revolution in the U.S.A.
and one of the tools I use is educating the public about the events of
9/11/01.
If you want kooky , you're welcome to come for a family dinner sometime, we get pretty goofy around the table.
Cheers, and watch your head with those fly unders!
- Login to post comments
- 1 vote
"But if you are asking me to
"But if you are asking me to condemn someone I
have respect for and like because he chooses to do some research into
some areas he finds interesting, the answer is no."
Who said anything about condemning? Is that like threats? Do you
always use extravagant terminology? I don't think Jones is any longer an
effective representative of the movement. I hope he keeps doing his
research and hope that helps.
What's clear to me is that you have a different threshold for
credibility than others. And some difference of opinion around that is
only natural. Not a big problem. What doesn't work is refuting direct
experience. Do you have more direct experience with the inner workings
of this movement than I? Have you read books about social movements? If
so, then you are going to have to do a much better job defending your
position as all I have to do is point at the TruthMove forum or a
history book to back up my position. You got any reading for me?
"I freely admit I may be wrong about that, but you're going to have
to provide concrete evidence, not just conjecture and supposition."
Then you have really said nothing. You are willing to be wrong, but
direct experience won't be a factor? Do I have to provide my resume? I
don't blame you for not assuming I know what I'm talking about just
because I say so. But... those who agree with me are some of the most
committed, experienced, and insightful people in the movement. Do they
have to give you a resume too?
Siting history isn't dogma and so I think you are the one with the burden of proof here.
- Login to post comments
- 0 votes
MSM
LeftWright said.."or is your strategy all about gaining credibility with the msm?" "That's even funnier."
That was not addressed to me-but frankly that is exactly my strategy. Why? Because.....
LeftWright said...."I realized long ago that the day the msm takes
this issue seriously and reports honestly is the day most of us can go
back to what we were doing before we got involved in this."
That's why. Yes, that is indeed my goal. And here is evidence of progress towards that goal....
That was a Fox News Special Titled ..."Secrets of 9-11"
But those "secrets" have been exposed for years by some of us
including on this very site. That is called getting credibility. This
report would never have aired during the Bush Administration because
there is a cover up and it's very easy to expose. This report is just
the tip of the iceberg.
I have never accused the MSM of being "in on it" nor "TV Fakery" BS.
It is not the MSM putting forth incredible nonsense and BS it is a so
called truth movement. Burning bridges with politicians and the MSM is
not a very good tactic to say the least. Now some in this "truth
movement" probably think this report aired by Fox is more MSM BS because
it seems to indicate that planes were hijacked, well there is more to
9-11 than building 7. Planes flew into buildings. There is a bigger
picture out there.
- Login to post comments
- 0 votes
Gentlemen -
This sub-thread is completely off topic, so we will have to continue it on a more appropriate blog sometime soon.
Don't lose your sense of humor.
Cheers!
- Login to post comments
- 4 votes
The whole blog is OFF TOPIC
Or is this suddenly Fakequakeblogger.com?
Good job banning Vulich.
- Login to post comments
- 1 vote
Yet another threat from Jules?
"Yet another threat from Jules, I'll add it to the others."
Wow. Didn't think you could so easily top yourself. My statement that
I am lobbying to have you demoted is not a threat as the statement is
it's own action. What I said is already lobbying.
I'd also point out that I find your use of the term threat and
suggestion that I make threats to be totally inappropriate and far
beyond acceptable behavior for comments on this site. Who among us does
everything we hope to do? I'm quite sure I haven't delivered on every
promise. But "threats" are something else and you should know that.
Your behavior here further confirms my concern about your moderation.
Or perhaps you need a break. Maybe you are burnt out just like anyone
who really cares about this can be. Maybe you need to re-evaluate your
position and get back to me, or rather us.
I don't 'believe' this stuff. I've learned how it works. Good
strategy is not opinion but historical fact. The history of social
movements and the history of this movement. Some things don't work and I
do not intend to accept you laughing at me because I know what does.
That's a direct act of ignorance, and it has no place in a movement
about truth.
- Login to post comments
- 2 votes
hmm...
somewhere out there Dr. David Ray Griffin is
wiping his brow and thanking his lucky stars that something more insane
than voice morphing has come along.
- Login to post comments
- 0 votes
Do you mean
like expecting millions of independent
activists and researchers to line up behind an orthodoxy arbitrarily
imposed by a small group of people?
Now, that's truly insane (and not at all the world I want to live in, do you?).
Cheers!
- Login to post comments
- 4 votes
People line up behind good
People line up behind good ideas, and I think
it's everybody's job to promote them and to point out bad ideas and bad
research also. That's not the job of a small group of people, it's the
job of everybody, but it is true that only a small group of people have
been acting responsibly in all of this. I guess you think there is
strength in numbers, well let me tell you, you are the one preaching
orthodoxy to the choir. You and the people in defense of conspiracy
stuff like what Jones is doing are the small group that is trying to
impose an orthodoxy on all the good meaning activists who actually
outnumber you but are not represented in large numbers on this website. I
agree that we need the movement to grow, but don't you think you are
alienating people with all of this junk science? Let me ask you
something, how do you know that directed energy weapons didn't destroy
the WTC? Because that idea is just as reasonable as the idea that we are
going to save humanity with an overunity device, or find out the secret
plans of the elite to engineer catastrophes. You are totally
inconsistent on all of this and you should be able to recognize that if
you are being honest with yourself. Is Jones saying something that
sounds credible in a way that DEW does not? Don't we condemn DEW? Or is
that just more of the friendly fences approach? Do I have to respect
anti-semitism if that's what makes some people tick? Your remark that a
small group is attempting to impose orthodoxy is combative, so let me
tell you again you are wrong in your assessment of what the goals of the
Jones critics are. It's not about telling people what to think, it's
about standing up for what keeps us together.
- Login to post comments
- 1 vote
Request for clarifications (and some comments)
What orthodoxy am I preaching to what choir?
What "conspiracy stuff (like what Jones is doing)" ?
What orthodoxy is this small group trying to impose (on all the good meaning activists)?
What "small group"?
What "junk science" ?
Are you aware of the rather extreme conflation you are employing and, if so, why are you employing it?
Why are you interjecting anti-semitism into this discussion?
Why do you attempt to link "friendly fences" with anti-semitism?
How does trampling all over someone's right to pursue their own lines of research "keep[s] us together"?
Now a few comments (and please pause to refresh your understanding of epistemology now, thank you).
1) I don't know absolutely that some sort of DEW was not used at the WTC, but I have yet to see any evidence whatsoever that indicates its use as part of the demolitions.
2) Dr. Jones is pursuing two lines of research (or at least that's
what we're now discussing), he has not yet stated any conclusions based
on his research. Thus, there is nothing about his work to date that
even remotely resembles the claims that some have made about DEW use at
the WTC. You are comparing apples to fairies here.
3) Yes, I totally condemn the Active Resistance systems now in
service in North America. I don't think the royal "we" should condemn
anything, ever, however. That leads down a road I have no interest in.
Everyone is free to support or condemn anything or anyone as they
choose, that is the nature of being a free moral agent.
4) No one, and certainly not me, is telling you to do anything. In
fact, I'm trying to defend Dr. Jones right to do what he chooses to do,
even when I may not agree with some of his actions. [ Kind of odd that
no one has asked me my opinion on all of this, eh?]
5) I find it rather sad that some alleged critical thinkers are
jumping to such massive conclusions (and we're talking about World
Record Triple Jumps here). Sad, but unfortunately, not surprising.
6) People line up behind ideas they believe in, sometimes they are "good" ideas and sometimes they aren't.
7) This is allegedly a truth movement, so those in it should be
seeking the truth, whether it fits some person's definition of "good" or
not.
8) From a public relations standpoint of course Dr. Jones research
into induced earthquakes and overunity devices is problematical for the
truth movement (that is PR 101, agreed?) But he is free to make
different choices than you or I might make, yes?
9) I have to wonder exactly what all this hand-wringing and scolding
is about, though. This is all about credibility, yes? Well, for anyone
who understands junior high science it won't matter that one of
the nine authors of the first peer-reviewed paper on the nanothermite
found in the WTC dust also does research in some other exotic areas. As
for credibility with the msm, the day 9/11 truth gets treated seriously
and honestly in the msm is the day all of our work to get a new
investigation will be done. As for the very few people who could
actually understand and critique the nanothermite paper, those inclined
to do so will read it and others will look at the affiliations of the
authors and dismiss the paper out of hand (a chemist did this to me
earlier this month in Seattle) and thus not ever get near the fact that
one of the authors is doing some other (rather exotic, in some people's
opinion) research. I think the only people who will make much of this
belong to the Jonathan Kay school of critical thinking. Are we really
worried about them at this point?
Finally, I have absolutely no idea what you do as an activist offline. Do you have any idea what I do offline as an activist?
The truth shall set us free and everyone has their own path to the truth, some paths are longer than others.
Love is the only way forward and love means letting people follow their own path, even when you disagree with said path.
- Login to post comments
- 0 votes
Don't tell me I need to brush
Don't tell me I need to brush up on
epistemology. I am a professional published epistemologist. My advisor
is one of, perhaps THE, best epistemologists in the world right now.
Epistemology is what I do for a living.
- Login to post comments
- 0 votes
I would have to say, then,
based on my reading of your comments, that you are completely failing to practice your profession here.
Perhaps you could cite some of your work as an epistemologist?
After all, anyone can claim anything online and, quite frankly, based on
what I have read of your comments to date, I don't believe you.
[I see after googling your name that you are a graduate student at UCLA, is that correct?]
Additionally, since you haven't had the courtesy to respond to any of
my requests for clarification, I see no reason to continue this thread
with you until you do.
Finally, as I said above, your logical jumps are greater than any Olympic triple jumper in history.
I hope that you and yours are well.
Good day.
- Login to post comments
- 0 votes
http://www.logos-and-episteme
http://www.logos-and-episteme.proiectsbc.ro/sites/default/files/PEER-HOO...
read that you jerk. I have published elsewhere as well.
How about this one:
http://philosophy.ucf.edu/fpr/issues-9_1.php
You don't know jack about epistemology. I study under one of the best
epistemologists in the world, meanwhile you are trying to call me a
liar. I take that real personally. I have absolutely not failed to
practice my profession, what the hell are you talking about? You don't
have a clue at all what epistemology is but let me give you a quick
primer: epistemology is the study of knowledge. We typically analyze
knowledge as justified true belief, although there are certain
conditions in which that is not sufficient. We call these special cases
"Gettier cases". Cases where you are lucky to have a justiified true
belief. Knowledge is incompatible with luck.
- Login to post comments
- 0 votes
sorry - off larger topic
@Vulich: (When you have an extra moment) I am
hoping you could provide a quick reference and/or feedback. After
reading this conversation, I'm jumping at the chance to ask this of
someone with your area of expertise.
I'm not educated in philosophy/epistemology, but I've been coming to
the conclusion in my own mind, for some years, that belief does not
exist. Could you point me to any good reading material on the subject
or give me your thoughts/example that might help to clarify your
understanding of belief (and how it cannot be explained as rational
thought instead)? Thanks in advance.
- Login to post comments
- 1 vote
Belief is an attitude that
Belief is an attitude that one takes to a
proposition. A proposition is kind of like a sentence, one can either
affirm its content as true, in which case the proposition is believed,
or reject the content as false, in which case the proposition is denied
(the negation of the proposition is believed in such a case). That's all
I have to say about belief. It's not really anything special. Everyone
has beliefs. The real question is how many of our beliefs are knowledge?
Anyone can believe anything just by taking a sentence to be true.
Knowledge requires more, at a minimum a belief must be justified in
addition to being true in order to count as knowledge.
- Login to post comments
- 0 votes
You don't care about
You don't care about credibility because you
think that the movement will always be ridiculed by people whether we
deserve it or not. Sounds like you don't think we'll ever actually
achieve our goal. Well, call me crazy but I'm actually interested in us
achieving our goal, so unlike you I am not going to proceed with the
jaded attitude that any old truth movement is fine as long as people SAY
that they want a new investigation.
- Login to post comments
- 1 vote
How can you possibly know what I care about?
Have you even had the courtesy to ask me what my opinion on all this is?
You have to be the absolutely worst epistemologist in history, or you only turn on that discipline when and where it suits you.
You continually misrepresent my position (which you haven't asked for and clearly don't know) on any number of things.
Are you really this ignorant, that angry or are you simply pursuing an agenda?
Btw, have you seen the 9/11: Blueprint For Truth or the Nanothermite dvds?
Those are just two of the dvd's I helped make working with 911tv.org
during the last several years working as a full time activist for 9/11
truth (I have spent thousands of dollars and thousands of hours working
for 9/11 truth. So, yes, (*^*&%#$%), I do care very much about the
cause and the movement, but I'm not willing to trample anyone's rights
to get there and I don't throw people under buses because they make
mistakes or sometimes do things I don't agree with.)
Tell me, Vulich, what kind of a world do you want to live in?
- Login to post comments
- 4 votes
-I am not one of the worst
-I am not one of the worst epistemologists in
history, I am actually quite good and well regarded by my colleagues due
to my awards, honors, and achievements.
-I haven't misrepresented any of your views about anything. I wonder what you mean.
-I am not ignorant, and yes I am pursuing the agenda of a new
investigation into the crimes of September the 11th. Am I angry? Yes.
-I have seen Blueprint for truth, good work.
I don't doubt that you care, but I think you are being extremely
counterproductive jumping to the defense of Jones when you really should
be helping assist in the criticisms. What he is doing is wrong, i think
people are able to see that, or if they don't they will find out soon
enough.
- Login to post comments
- -3 votes
One last question, Vulich ...
If the roles were reversed and I was defending your
right to do what you choose to do (including things I disagree with),
would you be so quick to trample on that right or waste lots of time
hammering at me to join a mob running someone (you, in this case) out of
town?
Perhaps you can answer that simple question...
[ Also, perhaps you can summarize what you think my views are on this
subject and we will see how close they are to those I actually hold,
thanks]
- Login to post comments
- 5 votes
After being called a liar
After being called a liar about my profession
and my publication record I feel like it is a mistake to even stoop to
engage in dialogue with you. A full apology would definitely be in
order. But anyways, your failure to trust me, an eminently rational
person with an obvious commitment to this cause, says a lot about you,
and it is your problem to deal with. I think you are implying in your
comment here that Jones is being run off by a mob. That indicates to me
that you don't hold many members of this forum in high regard, basically
saying that people are operating with a mob mentality. That's not the
case, people are responding to a pattern of questionable behavior and
strange statements, nothing too complicated here. People are using their
minds and thinking for themselves. That's rather the opposite of a mob.
I feel like YOU are a part of a mob that is running people like me out
of the movement simply because we don't accept the prevailing wisdom
that certain people are immune from criticism. I teach college students
all of the time, they ask questions when they don't understand
something, and they are not satisfied until they get reasonable answers.
I agree with that method. To answer your question I would say that
nobody is having their rights trampled on. In our society we are free to
criticize people for doing things that they have a right to do, that is
not removing a right. If I ever engaged in research into UFO's, the
illuminati, or any other conspiratorial psuedo scientific idea I would
absolutely expect to be alienated from any group of rational inquirers.
So again, the thing to say is that I would never research these fringe
ideas, and if I did it would be justified to alienate me. 911 has
nothing to do with the fringe, the case for a new investigation is a
scientific case built on sound understanding of high school physics and
standard operating procedures for dealing with terrorist threats and
hijackings.
- Login to post comments
- -2 votes
This would be hilarious, if it weren't so tragic
Where have I said that anyone is immune from criticism?
Excuse me, but your confirmation bias is showing and it isn't a pretty sight.
Let's be very clear here. What I am saying is that you or Dr.
Jones or anyone else has THE RIGHT to decide what they do, including
what they choose to research or not AND that you have THE RIGHT to
criticize anything you want to (however ill informed or ignorant the
criticism may or may not be).
Thus, it is your right to not research anything you don't want to AND to criticize others any time you want.
It is also Dr. Jones right to pursue any research he chooses and to
defend himself when his work is being mischaracterized or incorrectly
critiqued.
It is also my right to defend your and his rights, as well as everyone else's rights, here and in public.
Once again, I find it stunning that you have no idea what my actual
opinion on the wisdom of publicly announcing research into induced
earthquakes and/or "overunity" devices is, incredibly presumptuous of
you to assume that you do know and more than a little rude that you
don't even have the common courtesy to ask.
I think any neutral reading of the thread would indicate that, if any apology is necessary, it is you who owe me one.
I won't hold my breath.
As for trust, anyone who even has the slightest understanding of
Cointelpro knows the only person you can really trust is yourself, and I
do.
Unless you wish to begin from a more epistemologically sound starting point, this dialogue is now over.
I hope that you and yours are well.
- Login to post comments
- 3 votes
I said I'm a published
I said I'm a published epistemologist, you said
that you didn't believe me. That means you accused me of lying about
being a published epistemologist. Now it looks like you are accusing me
of being cointelpro. Well let me just tell you straight up I am not. And
can we get a moderator over here? Last time I checked calling someone
disinfo is against the rules.
- Login to post comments
- 2 votes
What do you think an
What do you think an epistemologically sound
staring point is? Why do you think you know more about epistemology than
a professional. Based on your postings it is clear that you don't even
know what subject matter epistemology deals with. You are not an expert
regarding epistemology, but I am. So for you to challenge me on my
understanding of epistemology is totally ironic.
Charming
Yet another threat from Jules, I'll add it to the others.
For someone who is allegedly educated, you seem to be confusing
"strategy" with "credibility" or is your strategy all about gaining
credibility with the msm?
That's even funnier.
The best way to end your "association" with me is to abandon your
911blogger account and leave the truth movement immediately, as all you
bring to it is negativity and destructive criticism.
Weren't you burnt out a few years ago?
Why hang around then, eh?