Gage 2011: $85,000
As I'm sure I'll be reminded by the kooks, it's not that big a salary in the Bay Area. But it does represent better than a 5% increase over 2010. How many people got that kind of a pay increase that year?
One thing that I find rather interesting is that AE911 Troof reported contributions and grants of $288,893, precisely the same amount as in 2010 to the dollar. Either their donors are remarkably stable, or they're getting all of that income from one source; my guess is the latter.
Box Boy reports putting in an 80-hour workweek again this year; that works out to 11.5 hours a day every day, or 16 hours if he works a normal five-days on, two days off. All I can say is that it's not evident from his output.
posted by Pat @ 11:55 PM
90 comments
90 Comments:
Let's see, after Gage gets his cut, we have $204 thousand divided by 1786 architects and engineers--that's $114 bucks apiece for those con artists who are lying for the money (isn't that how the argument goes?)
Idiot whines, "... (isn't that how the argument goes?)"
Wrong again, jackass.
"isn't that how the straw man argument goes."
There, corrected it for you, liar.
**********
Brian Good's Insane Homeless Mullet for sex predators. (Credit to Mike Rosefierce).
9/11 Sex Stalker Brian Good Unmasked!
Oh, so the 1786 architects and engineers are NOT lying for money? Then why do they put their professional reputations on the line, demanding new investigations?
The same reason we have scientists who are creationists Brian. You know this already, but as always the straws are coming up short.
Poor Brian, he's still babbling hysterically as if any of the tiny band of nutcases in AE911 Truth actually have "professional reputations".
Anyway, Brian, I know I've been gone for a while, because I was on a long romantic trip with my fiancee. You wouldn't understand this, since you can't even afford a decent haircut, much less a vacation, and "romance" to you is posting stalker spam about Willie Rodriguez all over the internet. But I'm back to humiliate you and enjoy your pathetic squealing.
Speaking of humiliating Brian, it's been 4 years since he first appeared at this blog, posting spam about (you guessed it) Willie Rodriguez and invisible widows.
But I'm sure all that effort has paid off. Brian, please list all that you have accomplished since you became the butt of all jokes at this blog. Please identify all the "widows" questions that have been answered. Please list the journals that have published "meatball on a fork". Please update us on the status of the government's new investigation into 9/11.
@ Pat:
"reported contributions and grants of $288,893, precisely the same amount as in 2010 to the dollar. Either their donors are remarkably stable, or they're getting all of that income from one source; my guess is the latter."
Quite unlikely. I am very sure that that figure includes the revenue from the "ChipIn" fundraisers they have to the left of their homepage. These yield somewhat random results, and with that you are not goinf to get the exact same sum twice in a year.
It really could be one of those rare coincidences that do in fact happen.
My best guess: It could be a simple cut'n'paste error. Which would render the form erroneous and ... that could spell trouble ^^ (Someone could tip off the ISR :P)
GMS, your comparison of the AE911Truth architects and engineers to creationists may be intuitively satisfying to someone with your biases, but it falls apart upon examination.
The creationists impose an ideological and political agenda on their science, resulting in a thesis that is contradictory to a large body of established science. In that way they more resemble NIST than they do the independent skeptics who want new investigations.
Ian, your belief that I can't afford a haircut is just another in a long line of your irrational assumptions--but it very well complements your belief in invisible widows.
The widows' questions that have been answered (all 27 of them) are clearly marked in their listing
of their 300 questions at justicefor911.org, Appendix 4.
Great idea, Oystein. If you can't prevail on facts, sic the bureaucracy on 'em!
"Oh, so the 1786 architects and engineers are NOT lying for money? Then why do they put their professional reputations on the line, demanding new investigations?"
Short answer: They're idiots.
Longer answer: They're idiots.
And Truthers call us all "paid shills". Hell Gage is the biggest paid shill the Truthers have.
MGF, which exactly of those 6 AIA Fellows, 40 PhD engineers, 50 structural engineers, 40 highrise architects or 10 Stanford engineers are idiots and why?
Brian, you haven't answered my questions. Please identify which of the "widows" question that YOU have gotten answered through your efforts. Also, please identify all the journals that have published "meatball on a fork" and report on the progress of the government's new investigation into 9/11.
MGF, which exactly of those 6 AIA Fellows, 40 PhD engineers, 50 structural engineers, 40 highrise architects or 10 Stanford engineers are idiots and why?
All of them, because they're dumb enough to believe a con artist like Gage.
Ian, does your alleged fiancee know about your gleeful remarks about the widows' frustration?
Where do you get the idea that all of the worthies of AE911Truth "believe" Mr. Gage? Upon what is your opinion that Mr. Gage is a con artist based?
What do you think about your buddy Wizzie? First he said he'd abandoned all the conspiracy stuff, and then he told his basement bombs story in Iran. Seems like he tells different audiences different stories.
Ian, does your alleged fiancee know about your gleeful remarks about the widows' frustration?
Nobody cares about your "widows".
Where do you get the idea that all of the worthies of AE911Truth "believe" Mr. Gage?
So they don't? So the crackpot group AE911Truth is even smaller than you claim?
Upon what is your opinion that Mr. Gage is a con artist based?
The fact that he makes money lying to people.
What do you think about your buddy Wizzie? First he said he'd abandoned all the conspiracy stuff, and then he told his basement bombs story in Iran. Seems like he tells different audiences different stories.
Nobody cares about your homosexual obsession with Willie Rodriguez, but it's good to see that you don't think that there were bombs in the WTC. Maybe your not quite the hopeless, pathetic lunatic you makes yourself out to be.
Anyway, Brian, I know you have a hard time understanding things that you read, which is why you're so confused about 9/11, but it shouldn't be too hard to read my posts and answer my questions.
Please identify which of the "widows" question that YOU have gotten answered through your efforts. Also, please identify all the journals that have published "meatball on a fork" and report on the progress of the government's new investigation into 9/11.
You've been posting here for 4 years. Surely, you must have accomplished many things in that time to advance 9/11 truth, right?
nwor
LOL! I e-mailed Jim Fetzer about him not being a firefighter and not knowing how the collapses were the result of the plane impacts and fires and at the end of his reply he gave me a big "FU!"
That old fool doesn't care about anything or anyone but himself.
I see I've humiliated Brian yet again, by asking him what 4 years of dumbspam on this blog has accomplished, and the answer is absolutely nothing. The truth movement remains as much as joke as it was the day Brian started posting here, but hey, at least we've enjoyed the pathetic squealing of a failed janitor who lives with his parents, wears women's underwear, and believes in magic thermite elves.
Hey Brian, remember that time you were so hysterical about me calling you "petgoat" that you changed your name to "New Yorker" (my name back in the old comment section days) and tried to pretend you were me? It didn't work too well because you're mentally ill and just posted the same spam you always do.
Of course, it's the same obsessions and spam that make us realize that, in addition to being petgoat, you are also punxsutawneybarney, truebeleaguer, truetruther, poordumbbastard, contrivance, watson, etc. etc.
I'm particularly amused that you need 2 youtube identities. I guess once "punxsutawneybarney" got banned from posting spam on Willie Rodriguez videos, you needed a new ID (truetruther) to post the same spam.
You did the same thing with 911oz. You posted thousands of pages of dumbspam as "Brian Good", and they banned you, so you came back to post the same dumbspam as "watson", and they banned you again.
This comment has been removed by the author.
Ian, as usual you don't know what you're talking about.
The truth movement has penetrated everywhere, and now enjoys more widespread respect than ever. For instance, Amy Goodman and Jimmie Carter have expressed support for calls for new investigations. Veterans for Peace adopted a resolution calling for new investigations.
I think you owe it to your alleged financee to tell her how much pleasure you take in chortelling about the widows' frustration.
Your detective work is silly, given that there are 236 Brian Goods in the USA, and any idiot can post on the internet under the name "Ian" or any other name he she or it wishes.
"MGF, which exactly of those 6 AIA Fellows, 40 PhD engineers, 50 structural engineers, 40 highrise architects or 10 Stanford engineers are idiots and why?"
All of them. Why? Because they signed the petition.
Let me break it down for you:
If you believe 9/11 was an inside job- you're an idiot.
If you believe the Twin Towers and WTC7 were brought down by controlled demolition - you're an idiot.
If you embrace a theory that nanothermite was discovered in the wreckage, even though the same lax chain of evidence would not hold up an any court of law - you're an idiot.
Being educated does not immunize a person from being an idiot. A&E911 Troof is all about political theory and ego, and nothing about engineering or science.
MGF, did you read the petition? It doesn't say anything about an inside job.
It doesn't say the towers were brought down by controlled demolition.
NIST's evidence wouldn't hold up in a court of law. Why do you hold the truthers to a different standard than you hold NIST?
What exactly about the petition is about ego and politics? It seems to me that you're projecting yourself on others.
The Truth is the WTC was attacked by Al Qaeda hijackers flying 767s, and it collapsed due to the damage and fires.
Any new investigation will confirm this.
Period.
511 socamel
The truth movement has penetrated everywhere, and now enjoys more widespread respect than ever. For instance, Amy Goodman and Jimmie Carter have expressed support for calls for new investigations. Veterans for Peace adopted a resolution calling for new investigations.
Brian, I didn't ask if some nobodies asked for a new investigation. I asked the status of the new investigation. Where is it?
I think you owe it to your alleged financee to tell her how much pleasure you take in chortelling about the widows' frustration.
Nobody cares about your "widows". We do care, however, about your hysterical squealing and frustration over the fact that you're a failed janitor who has attached his entire life to a failed crackpot conspiracy cult.
Your detective work is silly, given that there are 236 Brian Goods in the USA, and any idiot can post on the internet under the name "Ian" or any other name he she or it wishes.
Poor Brian. I've humiliated him again.
MGF, did you read the petition? It doesn't say anything about an inside job.
It doesn't say the towers were brought down by controlled demolition.
Nobody cares about a petition signed by a tiny group of losers.
NIST's evidence wouldn't hold up in a court of law.
Brian, being the dean of Harvard Law School, would know about what would and wouldn't hold up in a court of law, so we should listen to him.
Oh wait, Brian isn't the dean of Harvard Law. He's a failed janitor who lives with his parents.
MGF, if any new investigation will "confirm" that the buildings fell from fires, then what are you afraid of? Why not confirm it?
Ian, does your financee know that you think the widows are nobodies?
NIST's evidence wouldn't hold up on a court of law because NIST specifically states that its findings can not be used in court.
NIST's evidence wouldn't hold up on a court of law because NIST specifically states that its findings can not be used in court.
Would you mind sharing where you got that?
"MGF, if any new investigation will "confirm" that the buildings fell from fires, then what are you afraid of? Why not confirm it?"
Why spend money to confirm the obvious? Who does that?>
MGF, if any new investigation will "confirm" that the buildings fell from fires, then what are you afraid of? Why not confirm it?
Because it would be a waste of time and money. Nobody but a handful of liars and lunatics thinks there's any reason for a new investigation, and if the government were in the business of catering to the whims of every lunatic with a cardboard sign out there, it would be even more dysfunctional than it is now.
Ian, does your financee know that you think the widows are nobodies?
She doesn't care about your nobody "widows".
NIST's evidence wouldn't hold up on a court of law because NIST specifically states that its findings can not be used in court.
Link, please.
MGF, while you may think it's obvious that the buildings fell from fires, the fact that you failed to remember the heat of fusion from Chem 1A class pretty well demolishes the credibility of your opinion.
It's not at all obvious to 1790 architects and engineers who are calling for new investigations.
MGF, while you may think it's obvious that the buildings fell from fires, the fact that you failed to remember the heat of fusion from Chem 1A class pretty well demolishes the credibility of your opinion.
Who better to judge the credibility of MGF than a mentally ill unemployed janitor who believes in modified attack baboons?
It's not at all obvious to 1790 architects and engineers who are calling for new investigations.
Thanks for proving my point: only a tiny group of crackpots want a new investigation, so there's no reason for another investigation.
Ian, the 1790 architects and engineers include among their numbers 50 structural engineers, 40 high-rise architects, 6 AIA Fellows, 40 PhD engineers and 10 Stanford engineers. Would you care to name any particular person among these worthies and provide evidence that he or she is a crackpot?
How many independent architects and engineers can you cite who will say that NIST's collapse sequence is right? Lat time I checked, it was zero, nada, zilch.
"MGF, while you may think it's obvious that the buildings fell from fires, the fact that you failed to remember the heat of fusion from Chem 1A class pretty well demolishes the credibility of your opinion."
Yes, but I remember that a Squid is not an octopus. Heat of Fusion has jack-shit to do with the collapse. Damage from the planes combined with the fires and the stress from gravity set a chain reaction in motion.
Identical towers struck by identical planes with identical results. No mystery.
"Ian, the 1790 architects and engineers include among their numbers 50 structural engineers, 40 high-rise architects, 6 AIA Fellows, 40 PhD engineers and 10 Stanford engineers. Would you care to name any particular person among these worthies and provide evidence that he or she is a crackpot?"
If they signed Gage's petition they are crackpots. They should be ashamed of themselves.
tobver 3801
Ian, the 1790 architects and engineers include among their numbers 50 structural engineers, 40 high-rise architects, 6 AIA Fellows, 40 PhD engineers and 10 Stanford engineers. Would you care to name any particular person among these worthies and provide evidence that he or she is a crackpot?
All of them are crackpots because they believe 9/11 conspiracies.
How many independent architects and engineers can you cite who will say that NIST's collapse sequence is right? Lat time I checked, it was zero, nada, zilch.
False. Uncle Steve, remember? You fail again, Brian.
MGF, because of its association to the first law of thermodynamics, heat of fusion has everything to do with the collapse. If you had the education you claim you would know that.
Your characterization of the towers as "identical" reveals your ignorance of the circumstances. In WTC1 the core was oriented E-W and in WTC2 the core was oriented N-S. Big difference.
Thanks for showing that you can not provide any evidence that any of the architects & engineers foie truth are crackpots. You should have known it was a stupid claim.
Ian, there is no evidence that your "Uncle Steve" exists aside from the claims of a lying anonymous internet poster.
If your financee thinks the widows are nobody, she's as contemptible as you are.
Poor Brian, he's been humiliated again, and he knows that there are no widows, and that AE911Truth is a bunch of irrelevant liars, and all he can do is squeal hysterically.
Now, if you'll excuse me, I'm going to spend time with my fiancee. Maybe someday you could have a fiancee too, Brian. All you have to do is get a job, stop living with your parents, and stop babbling about magic thermite elves all over the internet. And a decent haircut would help too.
If you're as self-deluding about your financee as you are about the widows, she won't last long after your per diem outlays transition from celebratory to routine, Ian.
Thanks for the fashion tips, schmuck.
"MGF, because of its association to the first law of thermodynamics, heat of fusion has everything to do with the collapse. If you had the education you claim you would know that."
And your year and a half at San Jose State qualifies you how?
"Your characterization of the towers as "identical" reveals your ignorance of the circumstances. In WTC1 the core was oriented E-W and in WTC2 the core was oriented N-S. Big difference."
Nope, not big enough to affect the outcome.
"Thanks for showing that you can not provide any evidence that any of the architects & engineers foie truth are crackpots. You should have known it was a stupid claim."
Their signatures on the petition is the only evidence needed.
920"Thanks for the fashion tips, schmuck."
Just buy a new bowl.
Where do you get the idea that I attended San Jose State? Did Ian's financee tell you that?
If you're as self-deluding about your financee as you are about the widows, she won't last long after your per diem outlays transition from celebratory to routine, Ian.
Thanks for the fashion tips, schmuck.
My, such squealing!
I also didn't give you any fashion tips, but now that you mention it, it would be better for your romantic prospects if your wardrobe wasn't entirely made up of things stolen from Goodwill's dumpster.
Where do you get the idea that I attended San Jose State? Did Ian's financee tell you that?
Brian, you told us "I failed out of San Jose State". You also told us "there are no widows".
But I see my successful romantic life has really humiliated you, especially since your "romantic life" routinely ends in restraining orders and pepper spray.
Anyway, Brian, since we're not discussing your invisible "widows" anymore, let's talk about the real causes of 9/11.
Have you read Bill Deagle's latest paper on how modified attack baboons planted micro-nukes in the towers? It's quite a compelling case.
In the words of Sweet Brown:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Nh7UgAprdpM
As far as conspiracy theories go, she ain't got time for that.
GMS, your comparison of the AE911Truth architects and engineers to creationists may be intuitively satisfying to someone with your biases, but it falls apart upon examination.
The creationists impose an ideological and political agenda on their science, resulting in a thesis that is contradictory to a large body of established science. In that way they more resemble NIST than they do the independent skeptics who want new investigations.
Nice dodge Brian. The fact is that there are scientists who risk their reputation too for creationism. So as always your argument is pointless. We have been over this before, as noted earlier.
But let's rehash:
Who creates their own peer review process, & publish in fake journals?
Creationists & truthers.
Who makes up excuses about a global conspiracy among academia?
Creationists & truthers.
Who cherry picks the evidence & fails to accommodate for contradicting facts?
Creationists & truthers.
Who makes appeals to popularity & authority?
Creationists & truthers.
Who subjects their research to external peer review & have had their research validated in multiple reputable journals?
Not truthers & creationists.
Keep dancing. Sorry Brian, but collapse due to fire is well established in the real academic world. Of course we have reputable agencies & societies across the planet that the so called scholars could be submitting their work to, but unfortunately we have to settle for Gage's list, youtube videos, & the mental circle jerk of Stephen Jones, et al. Facts are stubborn things.
Looks familiar:
http://www.christiananswers.net/q-eden/edn-scientists.html
http://creation.com/journal-of-creation-formerly-technical-journal-tj
You've got your answer Brian why some scientists fall for pseudoscience. It's your choice to engage reality or not. If experience is any sort of marker, I am betting you will go with the latter.
http://dl.dropbox.com/u/64959841/9119ProgressReport022912_rev1_030112web.pdf
Dr James Millette stated March 1, 2012:
"The red/gray chips found in the WTC dust at four sites in New York City are consistent with a carbon steel coated with an epoxy resin that contains primarily iron oxide and kaolin clay pigments.
There is no evidence of individual elemental aluminum particles of any size in the red/gray chips, therefore the red layer of the red/gray chips is not thermite or nanothermite."
Well this puts a huge hole in the Truthers theories.
Ian, if you took all the lies out of your post there would be nothing left.
GMS, you shift the goalposts so far they're not even in the stadium any more! I took exception when you compared the 1795 architects and engineers for truth to creationists, and I pointed out that it is the NIST true believers who more resemble the creationists.
So you reframed the issue in terms of comparing the behavior of some "truthers" to creationists. Tell me, how many among the 1795 architects and engineers publish in "fake journals"?
Who among them has made up excuses about a global conspiracy among academia?
Who among them cherry picks the evidence & fails to accommodate for contradicting facts?
Who among them makes appeals to popularity & authority?
You just make $h!t up.
TAW, what peer-reviewed journal has published Dr. Millette's findings? I forget. And what laboratory has replicated his findings? And how come he didn't verify his findings by running a simple DSC to verify that his chips were the same as Dr. Harrit's chips?
Also, TAW, Dr. Millette's work--if it pans out, and I'll reserve judgment until it's replicated and published--only would put holes in the nanothermite theory.
The nanothermite theory is no more indispensible to the 9/11 Truth undertaking than is pod theory, directed energy theory, no-planes theory, Pentagon no-planes theory, remote-controlled aircraft theory, controlled demolition theory, or any other theory.
You are confusing your own desperate enthusiasm for Dr. Millette's claims with the importance of those claims. If Dr. Millette turns out to be correct, it embarrasses only Dr. Jones's team and their supporters.
Also, TAW, Dr. Millette's work--if it pans out, and I'll reserve judgment until it's replicated and
You don't have any kind of experiments that the Twoof Movement conducted last year nor this year. So you're conclussion is seriously fucked up without any kind of test.
You are confusing your own desperate enthusiasm for Dr. Millette's claims with the importance of those claims. If Dr. Millette turns out to be correct, it embarrasses only Dr. Jones's team and their supporters.
He's been correct since March 1, 2012. He hasn't been challenged by any fucknut Twoofer in over a year. So you're beating a dead horse again you loon.
http://dl.dropbox.com/u/64959841/9119ProgressReport022912_rev1_030112web.pdf
Dr. Millette has never been wrong since March 1, 2012. And yes Twoofers actually paid Dr. Millette to have the testing done.
This comment has been removed by the author.
TAW, where do you get the idea that I have some conclusion? Unlike youse intellectually-challenged guys here, I don't go around leaping to conclusions.
Dr. Millette can not be considered to be correct in the scientific sense until his findings are replicated. Your desperate leap of faith is exactly like that of the looniest twoofer seizing on any evidence of what he wants to believe.
As I understand it, Millette even opined that there were four different kinds of chips--which thus makes his refusal to run a DSC to verify that he had the same kind of Dr. Harrit seem really goofy.
Kinda like he got the results he was paid to get, and by god he wasn't going to risk learning anything that might upset or complicate those results. His lack of scientific curiosity is quite amazing.
TAW, where do you get the idea that I have some conclusion? Unlike youse intellectually-challenged guys here, I don't go around leaping to conclusions.
Because you have no facts to have a conclusion. Actually you do on a daily basis. Unlike you we're not suffering from ADD (Attention Deficit Disorder) because you lack any kind of brain cells to think coherently.
Dr. Millette can not be considered to be correct in the scientific sense until his findings are replicated.
He had FOUR samples to test, he replicated Harrit's test to a T. He found no thermite what-so-ever.
His lack of scientific curiosity is quite amazing.
Your lack of brain power is amazingly hilarious.
Cat got your tongue Goatboy?
Of course the troll hides underneath his bridge again.
Internet trolls should be washed and hung out to dry.
This comment has been removed by the author.
He did not replicate the Jones/Harrit study because he did not (he was afraid to) do the DSC.
TAW, where do you get the idea that I have some conclusion? Unlike youse intellectually-challenged guys here, I don't go around leaping to conclusions.
Brian, you concluded long ago that the WTC was destroyed in a controlled demolition on orders from the Bush administration. You believe this with a fanaticism immune to any reason or facts. That's why you get so hysterical when the facts refuting your delusions beliefs are presented to you. Then you go babbling about "science" as if a mentally ill unemployed janitor like yourself has any idea how the scientific method works. And then, in your hysteria an humiliation, you call us "girls".
Anyway, Brian, my fiancee wants to know more about the "widows". I told her that you have never presented any evidence that the widows exist or that they have questions, and you've actually said "there are no widows".
So if you have anything to present to her in support of all the dumbspam you've posted about "widows" over the years, please do so.
BTW, Brian, I showed my fiancee this classic photo of you:
http://911scholars.ning.com/profile/BrianGood
She had a look of amusement on her face. She said you look like a homeless lunatic and not someone who has any understanding of how academia works. She's a smart one. That's why I'm marrying her.
She also laughed when I pointed out that you had been banned from Scholars for 9/11 Truth. It's pretty pathetic that the truthers don't want you in their club, Brian.
GMS, you shift the goalposts so far they're not even in the stadium any more!
LOL! Give my original goal post and show where I moved them. Speaking of goal post moving:
Then why do they put their professional reputations on the line, demanding new investigations?
The creationists impose an ideological and political agenda on their science, resulting in a thesis that is contradictory to a large body of established science
I took exception when you compared the 1795 architects and engineers for truth to creationists, and I pointed out that it is the NIST true believers who more resemble the creationists.
You made a claim and have failed to back it up. Again, NIST has had their work peer reviewed by relevant authorities in the field, while Gage, Jones, & the clown car of truth dance around on the internet. You already know this but choose to maintain the lie.
So you reframed the issue in terms of comparing the behavior of some "truthers" to creationists. Tell me, how many among the 1795 architects and engineers publish in "fake journals"?
How many have published in the Urinal of 9/11 Studies & Bentham?
Anyone notice how Brian moved the goal posts? I was talking about more than Gage's appeal to authority, but now Brian wants to narrow it down to avoid feeling like a total quack.
Who among them has made up excuses about a global conspiracy among academia?
Then tell me Brian, why aren't they publishing in ral academic forums anywhere on the planet?
Who among them cherry picks the evidence & fails to accommodate for contradicting facts?
See any AE9111Truth video where they: crop out the fall of the East Mechanical Penthouse, remove the sound as to avoid hearing no explosives, ignore when firefighters say "secondary explosion" which has nothing to do with explosives, fail to addresses the visual evidence of the sagging and inward pull on the columns....oh and you, the way you parade around Astenah Asl but totally leave out every time he contradicts you.
Who among them makes appeals to popularity & authority?
Any time a truther, including yourself, parades around the stupid number of architects & engineers that have signed that moronic petition you are making an appeal to authority & popularity. Again,m we have been over this time & time and again, but you either fail to understand, or choose not to.
You just make $h!t up.
Speaking of making shit up.
He did not replicate the Jones/Harrit study because he did not (he was afraid to) do the DSC.
The way he explains it is that it's irrelevant in determining composition. Hmmm...who to believe? Fringe cult member Brian Good? Or the established expert in the field of forensic chemistry? Ohhhh this is a tough one.
Anyone replicate Jones's study yet? Nope.
Anyone publish a study in a real academic forum even supporting his findings? Nope.
Steven Jones reproduce his results & submit that study to any real academic forum on the planet? Nope.
Steven Jones continually running from academic scrutiny? Yup.
So you reframed the issue in terms of comparing the behavior of some "truthers" to creationists.
GO back Brian. You asked why the would put their reputations on the line. I answered for the same reason scientists who support creationism do. Now that fact is inconvenient to your delusions, so you then started the comparison contest about NIST to creationists. Sad thing remains, NIST was peer reviewed by a reputable scientific authority, while Gage, Jones, et al. are still hiding on the internet. Again, facts are stubborn things (J. Adams).
He did not replicate the Jones/Harrit study because he did not (he was afraid to) do the DSC.
Oh really? Let's just see what Milliette said in the introduction of his findings:
Introduction
This revised report summarizes the results to date of the analyses of red/gray chips found in
samples of dust generated by the World Trade Center (WTC) disaster of 11 September 2001.
MVA Scientific Consultants was requested by Mr. Chris Mohr of Classical Guide to
scientifically study red/gray chips from WTC dust that matched those presented in a paper by
Harrit et al., 2009,1 which concluded that thermitic material was present in the WTC dust.
Mr. Mohr was unable to gain access to any samples used in the Harrit study so four samples were chosen from the archives of MVA Scientific Consultants. These dust samples had been
collected within a month of 11 September 2001 and sent to MVA for different projects. They
are identified by the sample numbers shown below and on the New York City map shown in
Figure 1. The red/gray chips discussed in this report were analyzed during the period from
18 November 2011 to 20 February 2012. Some analytical results characterizing the particles
in the dust from two of the samples (4808-L1616 and 9119-X0135) had been previously
published in the scientific literature.
Did you not read the bolded area Goatboy or are you choosing to ignore that Millette had 4 dust samples to work with?
Also here's another fact Goatboy:
Results
The composition of the four samples of dust chosen for study were consistent with WTC
dust previously published 2,3 (Appendix A).
Red/gray chips that had the same morphology and appearance as those reported by Harrit et al.1, and fitting the criteria of being attracted by a magnet and having the SEMEDS x-ray elemental spectra described in their paper (Gray: Fe, Red: C,O, Al, Si, Fe) were found in the WTC dust from all four locations examined. The red layers were in the range of 15 to 30 micrometers thick. The gray layers were in the range of 10 to
50 micrometers thick (Appendix B).
Once again you ignore the bolded statement cause you didn't read anything in Millette's report and you were too scared to admit that you are 100% wrong.
Ian, don't tell me what I believe.
Did all your college professors have $85 haircuts? Few of the college professors I know have time for haircuts.
Where did you get the idea that I was banned from Scholars for 9/11 Truth? I went there to satisfy my curiosity about Dr. Fetzer, wondering if he'd gotten a bad rap. I found that he was very unreasonable and something of a bully, and my curiosity was satisfied.
GMS, yes you moved the goalpasts. The goal was to show that the 1795 architects and engineers for truth are like creation scientists. You didn't do that. Instead you compared your own cartoonish image of "truthers" to creation scientists.
NIST resembles creationists because they create their own peer review process, cherry pick the evidence, and fail to accommodate contradicting facts. NIST's enthusiasts make appeals to popularity & authority.
When was NIST's work peer reviewed and by whom?
I never heard of the Urinal of 9/11 Studies. None of those who published in Bentham are architects or engineers. I don't pretend to know why the journals won't publish articles critical of the official claims. Maybe Ron Brookman's experience gives a clue. He sent out 100 questionnaires to his structural engineering colleagues, and only one was every returned.
An appeal to authority is logically fallacious only if the supported proposition is incorrect. If all appeals to authority were fallacious, we could have no experts. You'd say "My Doctor says I need to exercise more, but his opinion is an inherent appeal to authority, and therefore that proves that I need to exercise less."
You don't use a DSC to determine composition, so that argument is a red herring. You use a DSC to replicate Dr. Harrit's methodology and verify that your chips are the same as his.
Who peer reviewed NIST's findings and when? How come not ONE independent engineer can be found who will endorse NIST's collapse sequence?
AE911Truth's work is available for criticism by anybody, any time. How come no qualified people have debunked it?
Your comparison of the 1795 architects and engineers to creationists rests on the erroneous assumption that they are all true believers in a fringe theory. You have no evidence to that effect. The petition does not say "we believe the buildings were blown up", and I never would have signed it myself if it did. The petition says the official reports are inadequate, and investigation of the possible use of explosives is justified. No religion, no conspiracy theory, just irrefutable fact.
This comment has been removed by the author.
TAW, why does it matter to you how many samples Dr. Millette had? The issue is that there's no reason to think his chips were the same as Dr. Harrit's. If he had run the DSC, and gotten energetic results such as Harrit's chips exhibited, then you'd have at least some grounds for comparison. Otherwise we have to suspect that Millette just tested some flakes of iron oxide paint that bear no resemblance to Harrit's energetic chips.
Dr. Millette's lack of curiosity in this regard is very strange.
No, I haven't read Dr. Millette's report and I don't intend to until his findings are replicated. I haven't read Dr. Jones's paper either for the same reason.
TAW, why does it matter to you how many samples Dr. Millette had?
It matters you you because his tests prove all of you weirdos wrong.
The issue is that there's no reason to think his chips were the same as Dr. Harrit's. If he had run the DSC, and gotten energetic results such as Harrit's chips exhibited, then you'd have at least some grounds for comparison. Otherwise we have to suspect that Millette just tested some flakes of iron oxide paint that bear no resemblance to Harrit's energetic chips.
Dude forget it, Millette proved you wrong, stop whining.
Dr. Millette's lack of curiosity in this regard is very strange.
And yet he doesn't suffer from ADD.
No, I haven't read Dr. Millette's report and I don't intend to until his findings are replicated.
So you can't be sure cause you've never read it so you can't be certain cause you refuse to read his paper cause you know he'll hand you your own ass. Right?
If Harrit is so "right" Goatboy, then where is his report about those red/grey chips from last year to counter Millette's report?
He has none!
No matter what you say weirdo, Millette will never be chanllenged because he done an independent report on the chips.
You will lose this arguement til you have an updated report from Harrit himself.
TAW, your responses are mostly non sequitur. What has the number of samples to do with your belief that Dr. Millette has proven somebody wrong?
Right, I can't be sure because I haven't read it. All I know about Dr. Millette's work is what people have told me about it. They've told me he didn't do the DSC, and the reason they cite for not doing it makes no sense.
I never said Dr. Harrit was right. Like I said, I never even read the paper.
You guys with your raging confirmation bias and your false dichotomies are a fine bunch of nimrods.
TAW, your responses are mostly non sequitur. What has the number of samples to do with your belief that Dr. Millette has proven somebody wrong?
Really? I'm not the one whining like a little school girl. That he actually got the money (from debunkers and truthers) and tested 4 samples of dust from 4 different areas. Your savor Harrit hasn't done shit as far as real tests is concerned.
Right, I can't be sure because I haven't read it. All I know about Dr. Millette's work is what people have told me about it. They've told me he didn't do the DSC, and the reason they cite for not doing it makes no sense.
You're scared to read it cause you have ADD. You haven't proven anything since 9/11 so what's the use of u being here? Who the fuck cares what "they" think? I know who the fuck you're talking about but they might've told you that cause you're a disgrace to their movement.
What makes perfect sense Goatboy, is that the Truth Movement you hold so dear and near has banished you from their ranks and they're making you look like an ass on their part. They give you some sort of fucked up info and you eat it up without ever confirming it through them. You never screen anything they spoon feed you.
I never said Dr. Harrit was right. Like I said, I never even read the paper.
Then you're wasting your own time then.
You guys with your raging confirmation bias and your false dichotomies are a fine bunch of nimrods.
Blaming us for you being illiterate? Figures!
I'm not scared to read Millette. There's no reason to read it. It hasn't been published, peer-reviewed, or replicated--and its results one way or the other are of little interest to me.
I'm not scared to read Millette. There's no reason to read it. It hasn't been published, peer-reviewed, or replicated--and its results one way or the other are of little interest to me.
Yes you are scared, otherwise you'd be refuting what he reported. Then you don't have a case then and he can't be disproved. It was published on March 1, 2012 Gonzo. The reason why it's of little interest to you is because you know you'll be proven wrong.
Squeal some more Goatboy.
Tell you what Goatboy, call these people and ask for Dr. James R. Millette and explain to thim why he's "wrong":
MVA Scientific Consultants
3300 Breckinridge Boulevard
Suite 400
Duluth, GA 30096
Tel: 770.662.8509
That's what I thought Goatboy. You can't prove him wrong cause you're a coward.
Knew you weren't up to the task of reading Millette's report from March 1, 2012 cause you knew that you'd be wrong and that Millette did what Harrit didn't do, his job.
You've got alot to learn that stupidity doesn't go very well for very long.
You're only demonstrating your irrationality, fool. When Dr. Millette gets his findings published or replicated so there's something to talk about, maybe I'll pay attention. In the meantime I will remain astounded that he doesn't have the curiosity to run a DSC and see if his chips are the same as Dr. Harrit's.
You're only demonstrating your irrationality, fool.
Sure, I'm "irrational" because I proved a point that you have ADD and can't cope with the real world.
When Dr. Millette gets his findings published or replicated so there's something to talk about, maybe I'll pay attention. In the meantime I will remain astounded that he doesn't have the curiosity to run a DSC and see if his chips are the same as Dr. Harrit's
March 1, 2012 he had it published in Betham. You lose. You can't afford to pay attention much less pay Harrit to do some actual tests like Millette did.
He ran the same tests as Harrit and found no traces of thermite anywhere. You lose again.
Come on piggy, squeal for daddy.
Why did Millette publish at Bentham? I thought that was a journal of ill repute!
He didn't do the same tests as Harrit. He didn't do the DSC. You don't know what you're talking about.
Why did Millette publish at Bentham? I thought that was a journal of ill repute!
To settle the matter that thermite wasn't found in any of the 4 dust samples he got. Only idiots like you repute it because you know it crushes your imagination.
He didn't do the same tests as Harrit. He didn't do the DSC. You don't know what you're talking about.
So says the coward who claims stupid things cause he can't read a report cause he knows that his ass will get handed to him. You don't have any evidence to say that I don't know anything cause unlike you I'm not an illiterate jackass like you are.
No matter how much Goatboy squeals, I'm gonna keep on laughing at him.
Perhaps Goatboy should go into acting, he'd make a great comedian and who knows he might win an Oscar for Best Comedian of the Year Award.
Look at Brian, babbling hysterically about $85 haicuts. Brian, I don't know anyone, professors or otherwise, who have $85 haircuts. I get a good haircut for a fraction of that price. You, on the other hand, have a hideous homeless mullet, which goes well with the fact that you're a mentally ill unemployed janitor, and not a professor.
"I'm not scared to read Millette. There's no reason to read it. It hasn't been published, peer-reviewed, or replicated--and its results one way or the other are of little interest to me."
You know what else wasn't peer-reviewed or replicated? The RJ Lee report. You guys love to quote it.
Doesn't matter, RJ Lee isn't any less accurate or believable.
Assclown pontificates, "...He didn't do the DSC. You don't know what you're talking about."
Aw look! The cretin who doesn't understand elementary concepts like Boyle's Law, the Ideal Gas Law and ΔT is yammering about another subject of which he knows nothing, DSC (differential scanning calorimetry). And, as usual, the shameless liar, cretin and pseudo-"intellectual" degenerate condescends to his moral and intellectual superiors.
We've already been over this, asshole: Dr. Millette didn't need to perform a DSC in order to prove that Harrit's "experimental results" are in error.
So STFU, asshole. You're like a broken record. In fact, as I've already proven, you know nothing about DSC, let alone elementary concepts like Boyle's Law, the Ideal Gas Law and ΔT. Hell, you can't even explain why DSC was "required" by the pseudo-scientific fraud (perpetual motion machines anyone?) Steven E. Jones, et al -- you lying gasbag.
You're an embarrassment to the "truth" movement, and if you had an ounce of self-awareness you'd slither in shame back to your mommy's basement.
**********
Brian Good's Insane Homeless Mullet for sex predators. (Credit to Mike Rosefierce).
9/11 Sex Stalker Brian Good Unmasked!
Brian, I'd like to remind you that my fiancee asked you for evidence that the widows have questions, and you have not provided it.
She's in tears right now because of this. Why do you take pleasure in my fiancee's pain? What's wrong with you?
Goatboy would make Dr. E.L. Brown look like Einstein.
Post a Comment
<< Home