Thursday, August 18, 2011

You Too Can Be a Peer Reviewer!

Apparently things are so bad over at the mostly defunct Journal of 911 Studies that Frank Legge is now begging for reviewers.



There are two papers in need of review for submission to the Journal of 9/11 Studies.
One is by David Chandler and myself. It provides evidence that the witnesses to the path of the plane approaching the Pentagon, who stated that it passed north of the Citgo service station, must have been mistaken. The paper concludes that the only plausible description of the approach is that the plane did not deviate round the service station but flew virtually straight and hit the Pentagon, as described by the vast majority of eye witnesses.

The other is by John Wyndham. Here is the abstract of his paper:
Abstract: The widespread belief among those who question the official account of 9/11, that a large plane did not hit the Pentagon on 9/11, is unsupported by the evidence. The failure of the 9/11 truth movement to reach consensus on this issue after almost a decade is largely due to a failure to rigorously apply the scientific method to the evidence as a whole. This paper, by so applying the evidence to each proposed theory, shows that a large plane hitting the Pentagon is by far the most plausible theory.


Great, so after 10 years of cutting edge research and truthseeking they finally figured out what the rest of us knew that Tuesday morning. And they wonder why nobody takes them seriously?

Labels: ,

5 Comments:

At 18 August, 2011 10:37, Blogger GuitarBill said...

If those "papers" are "scientific", then I'm the Easter Bunny.

FACT: There's a vast gulf between science and politics. And apparently, troofers are too brain-dead and dishonest to acknowledge the difference.

In other related news, WHY IS THE GOAT FUCKER STILL ALLOWED TO DEFACE SLC? I gave you two perfectly good (proven to work) solutions to the troll problem, AND YOU BALKED.

Why?

 
At 18 August, 2011 13:21, Blogger b. j. edwards said...

What?

Steven Jones course "Become a Certified Peer Reviewer"

http://911booger.blogspot.com/2007/06/wanted-few-good-peer-reviewers.html

...offered since 2007 didn't produce any?

 
At 18 August, 2011 14:02, Blogger Arcterus said...

The failure of the 9/11 truth movement to reach consensus on this issue after almost a decade is largely due to a failure to rigorously apply the scientific method to the evidence as a whole.

That's interesting. I thought the rigorous application of the scientific method defined the failure of the 9/11 truth movement.

 
At 18 August, 2011 15:29, Blogger paul w said...

The truthers are the the gift that keeps on giving.

Ten year later, and they figure a plane DID hit the Pentagon! Lol!

Ten year from now, the abstract of the new paper will be; the 'pull it' quote was taken out of context.

 
At 18 August, 2011 16:22, Blogger Steve Horgan said...

So, after all of the nonsense it was an aircraft after all? Is someone in the truther movement going to apologise for the numerous slanders and accusations levelled against ordinary decent Americans on this matter?

 

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home