BYU Suspends Jones
He must have been getting close to the Troooooooth!
"BYU has repeatedly said that it does not endorse assertions made by individual faculty," the statement said. "We are, however, concerned about the increasingly speculative and accusatory nature of these statements by Dr. Jones."
Last fall, BYU faculty posted statements on the university Web site that questioned whether Jones subjected the paper to rigorous academic peer review before he posted it at physics.byu.edu. Jones removed the paper from BYU's Web site Thursday at the university's request.
Efforts to reach Jones Thursday night were not successful. Jones told the Deseret Morning News on Wednesday that his paper had gone through an unusual third round of peer review in what is now an apparently unsuccessful effort to quell concerns on campus.
"BYU remains concerned that Dr. Jones' work on this topic has not been published in appropriate scientific venues," the university statement said.
Kudos to BYU, which apparently remembers what real scholarship is, as compared to the bilge the "Scholars" for 9-11 Denial put out.
Hat Tip: Chipmunk Stew at the JREF Forums. Joke borrowed from Gumboot's response.
posted by Pat @ 6:50 AM
28 comments
28 Comments:
Of course, the truthers are already spouting the "afraid of the truth!" poo.
But maybe if the guy hadn't set up a bogus scientific journal, he'd be in the clear.
CENSORSHIP!!
CENSORSHIP!!
Not.
Of course they're afraid of the truth--The truth that this guy is a wackjob and his drinking buddies are Jew-haters who majored in bad science.
CENSORSHIP!!
Agreed! And intimidation for anyone who deviates from the "official" fairytale.
CENSORSHIP!!
Agreed! And intimidation for anyone who deviates from the "official" fairytale.
And intimidation for anyone who deviates from the "official" fairytale.
How can someone have so many mistakes in a single sentence?
It's not intimidation - it's a desire to distance ones profession from a lunatic.
It's not deviation from a "fairytale", it's deviation from the psychological norm for homo sapiens.
And finally it's not a fairytale. Structural engineers, architects, ad physicists tend not to write fairytales when asked to analyze an event. Only anti-semitic lunatics with a room temperature IQ would do that.
Somehow I think this professor holds more creability that most fo the folks that post here...
Most of you use so many arguement fallacies to support the official conspiracy theory that it is simply foolish to read. Your favorite one-attacking the character instead of the facts. Crackpot, lunatic, blah blah, its all the same. Read the paper and confront the evidence with a factual rebuttal.
Your favorite one-attacking the character instead of the facts.
If that's the case, it's because all of the "facts" -- literally all, like each and every one of them without exception, has been debunked as incorrect, irrelevant and/or an intentional lie. The fact battle is over.
After we're done with character we'll start attacking your taste in clothes. Or your mom, who was wonderful in bed last night. I think she also called you an idiot, but it was difficult to tell as her mouth was full.
How can someone have so many mistakes in a single sentence?
How can one government spin such unbelievable fairytales?
Read the paper and confront the evidence with a factual rebuttal.
They've tried that (Gravy-train) and failed miserably. What's left? Well the weak-minded always resort to character assassination because of their character defects and lack of intellect.
I am certain that Prison Planet has no agenda either.
Sieg Heil Nesnyc
I am sure the US Government has no agenda either...
Ok factual rebuttal time:
He argues that sulfur residue possibly came from the use of thermite/thermate but ignores the more likely possibility that it came from gypsum, a main component of drywall. Only seeing what you wan to see in the results of an analysis while ignoring much more likely possibilities is very very VERY poor science. You don't need a degree to see that. I might also add that everyone else who actually holds a degree in a relevant field disagrees with Jones. That being said....
He's a total nut
Sieg Heil!!!
Hey, you certainly like that salute. You sure you don't have a funny little mustache under your hook-nose? LOL!
Lets see he claims that the passangers on Flight 93 were "gassed" by the government and that the phone calls were faked.
Gassed huh? That's a relatively new one. Don't think I've heard of a gassing on 9/11 before. Hmmm.
He has evidence of this right? This ace-dectective co-worker of yours?
His paper, as a scientific paper, is complete and utter garbage. The way it is structured, the lack of evidence to back up his conclusions. The fact that his study sample had multiple opportunity to be contaminated prior to its arrival to him...it would be laughed out of any valid scientific journal world wide. As a matter of fact, if a student handed in such a paper, they would recieve a failing grade.
Did I mention the OVERWHELMING Bias that would be in any and all of his paper via his confessed believe, regardless of his study results, that 9/11 was an inside job.
It is like me saying to you...I know drug X cures cancer. I have no proof, and all my peers disagree with me, but I know I am right. Now let me conduct a study to proof it, I promise I am not bias in the matter...
oh to laugh harder would be criminal.
As I've said before, BYU is wholly owned by The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints. Every church employee, from the building manager at my local chapel to the dean of BYU are under a morality clause.
If Jones doesn't keep his spiritual I's dotted and T's crossed, he's out.
I think it will be interesting to see where Jones (who has always claimed to be a devout mormon) goes with this. My guess is he will either have to make some apology for some of his actions, or he will turf himself from the church. We believe the church to be guided by divine inspiration. IF these 9-11 theories are true, God is certainly aware of it and would not allow his church to become a tool of these modern day "Gadianton Robbers" (a band of of evil conspirators responsible for provoking a series of wars for thier own gain in the Book of Mormon).
If Jones accuses the church of bending over for the gadiantons, he is basically throwing out one of our foundational beliefs.
Either way, he won't be our problem anymore.
Leaving the church would be a HUGE leap.
Utah is 70% mormon. There are many non-LDS who live there with some occaisional friction, but they otherwise get along with thier neighbors.
It would be different though for an ex-mormon who walked out while accusing the church of complicity in the murder of 3,000 innocent people. He'd be making himself a pariah in the community.
If he leaves the church, he'll be leaving the state.
Folks, if Professor Jone's work on 9/11 was accurate - let's put aside political bias, or people's point of view for a moment - then why was it never published in an academic journal? Jone's knows damn well about the importance of publishing in an established academic journal. There's no way he doesn't.
He's a chemist, so he'll be aware of the Journal of the American Chemical Society, the Journal of Chemical Sciences, etc. Why hasn't he submitted his studies there?
His research deals with the twin towers destruction. Why hasn't it been picked up by the Engineering News-Record? Or the Structural Engineer? Both of which extensively publish studies of structural failures?
The way to get research beyond the "this guy said... that guy says" arguments and into the realm of factual debate is to get the research published in peer reviewed journals so it can be discussed and debated among researchers in the various fields covered by the journals. Not self publication; that's always been the hallmark of the crank or the self promoter, even well before 9/11. Again, Professor Jones is a scientist, and has been a practicing one since I was in college (I remember him from the Cold Fusion event). He knows the importance of peer review and academic discussion through publication in established journals.
So, why doesn't he do it? If he seriously believes in the veracity of his research, why does he diminish it by not subjecting it to peer review? Why does he reduce it's legitimacy among scientists by not trying to get it accepted in an established, trusted journal? Publication is a surefire way to bestow legitimacy on his research. So why doesn't he do it?
Does he truly believe what he's saying?
Or, does he realized it can get picked apart and doesn't want to give anyone the opportunity to do so?
Hell, it's been picked apart ("shredded" would be more apt) even by laymen such as most of the commenters here. None of us are chemists or physicists or structural engineers, but we have enough of a grasp on the basic principles involved in those fields, and the procedures of impartial scientific study, to be able to say with great confidence that his theories are full of s**t. Not only that, we can even break them down and show exactly WHY they're full of s**t. I can just imagine what fully qualified professionals in the respective fields could do if he managed to get his "study" published. I just can't believe he hasn't been fired for incompetence (yet).
"None of us are chemists or physicists or structural engineers..."
Actually, some of us are. Your larger point is correct, though. ;o)
He's a chemist, so he'll be aware of the Journal of the American Chemical Society, the Journal of Chemical Sciences, etc. Why hasn't he submitted his studies there?
Nitpick: Jones is a physicist, not a chemist. Great points otherwise.
If I'm not mistaken, this is the same Steven Jones who teamed with Pons and Fleischmann from the University of Utah on "cold fusion." His name doesn't get mentioned much in connection with that fiasco because Pons and Fleischmann decided to "scoop" Jones when they announced their alleged success.
So this isn't Jones's first foray into questionable science.
Ooops. Telescopemerc, you got me there. My mistake. Since I was a chem undergrad during the whole Cold Fusion event, and since I keep associating him with that, I keep on saying "Chemist". Yes, acknowledged: I was wrong, Professor Jones is indeed a physicist.
Dicentra63 et al., regarding his association with Cold Fusion: That's exactly my point. Cold Fusion was a pretty damn controversial subject back then, yet that work in that field was and still is undergoing the accepted peer review process for publication.
Professor Jones understands the process's importance to establish a research topic's veracity and legitimacy, yet he circumvents the process by creating an organization to "peer review" the 9/11 "research". That's a very telling point. Not only is it like dictators establishing kangaroo courts and calling it justice, it's like that kangaroo court's members continually running away from the police and established courts. Ersatz justice.
Deep down they know that they're full of shit but they don't want to ruin the fun that comes with pretending that they're Neo in the Matrix.
And their excuse is that the engineers/chemists/demolitionists/etc. are in on it, either directly or by being bought off.
Of course two sentences later they'll say that the whole conspiracy could have been carried out by just a couple of dozen people.
I still maintain that it is impossible to be that stupid and still do things like pay your cable bill, hold a job, etc. It's not stupidity. It's evil.
Most of you use so many arguement fallacies to support the official conspiracy theory that it is simply foolish to read.
Unfortunately for you, we don't. Ergo your post is a strawman.
I mean I attack people, but since I've already destroyed their arguments it doesn't fall under ad hominem.
Since I was a chem undergrad during the whole Cold Fusion event, and since I keep associating him with that, I keep on saying "Chemist". Yes, acknowledged: I was wrong, Professor Jones is indeed a physicist.
Man, Elmond... if you keep admitting and correcting your mistakes like that, you'll never be as (in)famous as Jones and Fetzer. ;)
Post a Comment
<< Home