Re: Video: Professor of Physics Phd at Cal Tech says: 911 Inside Job
On 25 abr, 21:33, "Bill Habr" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message > > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > Cal Tech is the ELITE of ELITE in physics. > > > If Feynman were alive, he would point his finger straight at the 911 > > criminal operators, the yank bastards themselves ... > > >http://www.911blogger.com/node/8101 > > > No self-respecting scientist should keep his mouth shut. Its a > > fundamental challenge to the method of science, a detective work most > > demanding of INTELLECTUAL HONESTY. > > Isn't this the guy who has more conspiracy theories than Carter has pills? > > Whitewater, Vince Foster, moon landing hoax one week - we found a UFO on the > moon the > next, Oklahoma City bombing, a new conspiracy every day ad nauseum? Why can't any of you just discuss the fact that free-fall collapse of this building contradicts the laws of physics (God's law whom gave you and God's children whom's mass murder in Iraq you have allowed)? Why do you all have to avoid the topic and rather go on a chracter assassination which is totally abhorent to scientific method? -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Video: Professor of Physics Phd at Cal Tech says: 911 Inside Job
On 25 abr, 21:33, "Bill Habr" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message > > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > Cal Tech is the ELITE of ELITE in physics. > > > If Feynman were alive, he would point his finger straight at the 911 > > criminal operators, the yank bastards themselves ... > > >http://www.911blogger.com/node/8101 > > > No self-respecting scientist should keep his mouth shut. Its a > > fundamental challenge to the method of science, a detective work most > > demanding of INTELLECTUAL HONESTY. > > Isn't this the guy who has more conspiracy theories than Carter has pills? > > Whitewater, Vince Foster, moon landing hoax one week - we found a UFO on the > moon the > next, Oklahoma City bombing, a new conspiracy every day ad nauseum? Why can't any of you just discuss the fact that free-fall collapse of this building contradicts the laws of physics? Why do you all have to avoid the topic and rather go on a character assassination which is totally abhorent to scientific method? -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Video: Professor of Physics Phd at Cal Tech says: 911 Inside Job
On 28 abr, 13:56, Eric Gisse <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Apr 28, 8:44 am, War Office <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > On 25 abr, 21:33, "Bill Habr" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message > > > >news:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > > Cal Tech is the ELITE of ELITE in physics. > > > > > If Feynman were alive, he would point his finger straight at the 911 > > > > criminal operators, the yank bastards themselves ... > > > > >http://www.911blogger.com/node/8101 > > > > > No self-respecting scientist should keep his mouth shut. Its a > > > > fundamental challenge to the method of science, a detective work most > > > > demanding of INTELLECTUAL HONESTY. > > > > Isn't this the guy who has more conspiracy theories than Carter has pills? > > > > Whitewater, Vince Foster, moon landing hoax one week - we found a UFO on > > > the moon the > > > next, Oklahoma City bombing, a new conspiracy every day ad nauseum? > > > Why can't any of you just discuss the fact that free-fall collapse of > > this building contradicts the laws of physics? > > > Why do you all have to avoid the topic and rather go on a character > > assassination which is totally abhorent to scientific method? > > ...because that's all that is left. But no-one has critiqued Steven Jones' thesis. And this guy Professor Emeritus of Physics concurs with Jones' thesis. I challenge you to find any tenured or emirtus professor who has written a counter thesis to Jones' You realise everyone is still waiting for NIST to publish their final report and that in Dec 2006 they announced that they would investigate the explosives hypothesis as well as thermite to explain the molten steel? So as you can appreciate then this is still a current issue even Officially. Thus your feigned answer "...because that's all that is left" is a lie. Can you show me past threads of your own where you have argued about this Jones' thesis to any detail? -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Video: Professor of Physics Phd at Cal Tech says: 911 Inside Job
On 28 abr, 14:15, Eric Gisse <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Apr 24, 6:13 pm, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > > Cal Tech is the ELITE of ELITE in physics. > > "INN World Report interviewed Dr. Crockett Grabbe - professor of > physics at the University of Iowa - regarding his thoughts on the > 'collapses' of WTC1, WTC2, & WTC7. In this interview he lists numerous > reasons to suspect controlled demolition and expresses support for > alternative theories." > > A common mistake - I frequently confuse CalTech and U of Iowa. > > http://scholar.google.com/scholar?hl=en&lr=&safe=off&client=firefox-a... > > That's interesting, no publications on any engineering topic. A > professor of physics, not engineering, who claims that explosives were > planted in not only WTC7, but WTC 1 and 2 which were trigged by the > planes impacting the building. > > Why is anyone listening to this loon? There is no engineering professor or less who has written a counter- thesis to Jones' thesis Why Indeed Did The Twin Towers Completely Collapse http://www.journalof911studies.com/volume/200609/Why_Indeed_Did_the_WTC_Buildings_Completely_Collapse_Jones_Thermite_World_Trade_Center.pdf Have you even read it? Can you find me a counter-thesis, a direct respons to that thesis which rejects it in detail beyond a cursory "I don't agree"? Don't you find it interesting that this thesis which is held up by 90% of the Truth Movement as the smoking gun that WTC7 was controlled demolition has had no formal or professional response from defenders of the Official story? That the academic world remains silent? And yet Jones' career has published over 50 academic papers in esteemed journals. > > > > > If Feynman were alive, he would point his finger straight at the 911 > > criminal operators, the yank bastards themselves ... > > I don't recall Feynman ever advocating nutcase positions. You havn't even demonstrated as much and already you're on an ad hominem assassination? Are you lying and misrepresenting this issue deliberately? > > > > >http://www.911blogger.com/node/8101 > > > No self-respecting scientist should keep his mouth shut. Its a > > fundamental challenge to the method of science, a detective work most > > demanding of INTELLECTUAL HONESTY. > > I love how folks like you ask for intellectual honesty when every > effort is made to ignore evidence that doesn't agree with your > presupposed findings. Which evidence would that be? Please cite twhich evidence contradicts the controlled demolition hypothesis of WTC7 posited in this paper: http://www.journalof911studies.com/volume/200609/Why_Indeed_Did_the_WTC_Buildings_Completely_Collapse_Jones_Thermite_World_Trade_Center.pdf -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Video: Professor of Physics Phd at Cal Tech says: 911 Inside Job
On 28 abr, 16:06, Salmon Egg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On 4/28/07 9:44 AM, in article > [EMAIL PROTECTED], "War Office" > > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Why can't any of you just discuss the fact that free-fall collapse of > > this building contradicts the laws of physics? > > > Why do you all have to avoid the topic and rather go on a character > > assassination which is totally abhorent to scientific method? > > Sometimes, when I pee into the toilet, a few droplets rise to heights that > defy god's laws. Do I have magic urine? Was it recorded on video by three different television netoworks? How can we believe you when you have no evidence other than your own testimony to go by? How do you know that you're not mistaken? Have you tested this inquiry scientifically? Is there any way that an independent investigation could repeat and varify the experiemental results you are claiming to have observed? Have you written this down in a careful academically structured thesis such as this one: http://www.journalof911studies.com/volume/200609/Why_Indeed_Did_the_WTC_Buildings_Completely_Collapse_Jones_Thermite_World_Trade_Center.pdf > > -- If there is such a thing as intelligent design, please explain > hemorrhoids. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Video: Professor of Physics Phd at Cal Tech says: 911 Inside Job
On 28 abr, 14:30, "Michael A. Terrell" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Eric Gisse wrote: > > > On Apr 24, 6:13 pm, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > > Cal Tech is the ELITE of ELITE in physics. > > > "INN World Report interviewed Dr. Crockett Grabbe - professor of > > physics at the University of Iowa - regarding his thoughts on the > > 'collapses' of WTC1, WTC2, & WTC7. In this interview he lists numerous > > reasons to suspect controlled demolition and expresses support for > > alternative theories." > > > A common mistake - I frequently confuse CalTech and U of Iowa. > > >http://scholar.google.com/scholar?hl=en&lr=&safe=off&client=firefox-a... > > > That's interesting, no publications on any engineering topic. A > > professor of physics, not engineering, who claims that explosives were > > planted in not only WTC7, but WTC 1 and 2 which were trigged by the > > planes impacting the building. > > > Why is anyone listening to this loon? > >The same reason they listen to the even loonier Rosie O'donell? > >http://www.popularmechanics.com/blogs/911myths/4213805.html That is not a scientific paper. It makes unsubstantiated claims and asks the reader to trust their advice that they have inquired with 'experts'. Please compare that popular mechanics article of unsubstantiated claims with this varifiable substantiated and falsifiable theis by Professor Steven Jones: http://www.journalof911studies.com/volume/200609/Why_Indeed_Did_the_WTC_Buildings_Completely_Collapse_Jones_Thermite_World_Trade_Center.pdf It would be great if PM were willing to take on a critique of Jones' thesis and I want to add that it is no suprise that they refuse. Notice that they don't even mention Jones' in the article? And yet Jones is the most famous 9/11 controlled demolition theory academic second only perhaps to David Ray Griffin. If PM really intended to dispel the 'myth' that Rosie espoused then would they go for the heart of it?, namely: http://www.journalof911studies.com/volume/200609/Why_Indeed_Did_the_WTC_Buildings_Completely_Collapse_Jones_Thermite_World_Trade_Center.pdf > > -- > Service to my country? Been there, Done that, and I've got my DD214 to > prove it. > Member of DAV #85. > > Michael A. Terrell > Central Florida -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Video: Professor of Physics Phd at Cal Tech says: 911 Inside Job
On 28 abr, 14:30, "Michael A. Terrell" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Eric Gisse wrote: > > > On Apr 24, 6:13 pm, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > > Cal Tech is the ELITE of ELITE in physics. > > > "INN World Report interviewed Dr. Crockett Grabbe - professor of > > physics at the University of Iowa - regarding his thoughts on the > > 'collapses' of WTC1, WTC2, & WTC7. In this interview he lists numerous > > reasons to suspect controlled demolition and expresses support for > > alternative theories." > > > A common mistake - I frequently confuse CalTech and U of Iowa. > > >http://scholar.google.com/scholar?hl=en&lr=&safe=off&client=firefox-a... > > > That's interesting, no publications on any engineering topic. A > > professor of physics, not engineering, who claims that explosives were > > planted in not only WTC7, but WTC 1 and 2 which were trigged by the > > planes impacting the building. > > > Why is anyone listening to this loon? > >The same reason they listen to the even loonier Rosie O'donell? > >http://www.popularmechanics.com/blogs/911myths/4213805.html That is not a scientific paper. It makes unsubstantiated claims and asks the reader to trust their advice that they have inquired with 'experts'. Please compare that Popular Mechanics article of unsubstantiated claims with this varifiable substantiated and falsifiable thesis by Professor Steven Jones: http://www.journalof911studies.com/volume/200609/Why_Indeed_Did_the_WTC_Buildings_Completely_Collapse_Jones_Thermite_World_Trade_Center.pdf It would be great if PM were willing to take on a critique of Jones' thesis and I want to add that it is no suprise that they neglected to. Notice that they don't even mention StevenJones in the article? And yet Jones is the most famous 9/11 controlled demolition theory academic second only perhaps to David Ray Griffin. If PM really intended to dispel the 'myth' that Rosie espoused then wouldn't they go for the heart of it?, namely: http://www.journalof911studies.com/volume/200609/Why_Indeed_Did_the_WTC_Buildings_Completely_Collapse_Jones_Thermite_World_Trade_Center.pdf > > -- > Service to my country? Been there, Done that, and I've got my DD214 to > prove it. > Member of DAV #85. > > Michael A. Terrell > Central Florida -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Video: Professor of Physics Phd at Cal Tech says: 911 Inside Job
On 28 abr, 14:15, Eric Gisse <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Apr 24, 6:13 pm, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > > Cal Tech is the ELITE of ELITE in physics. > > "INN World Report interviewed Dr. Crockett Grabbe - professor of > physics at the University of Iowa - regarding his thoughts on the > 'collapses' of WTC1, WTC2, & WTC7. In this interview he lists numerous > reasons to suspect controlled demolition and expresses support for > alternative theories." > > A common mistake - I frequently confuse CalTech and U of Iowa. > > http://scholar.google.com/scholar?hl=en&lr=&safe=off&client=firefox-a... > > That's interesting, no publications on any engineering topic. None the less a phyics professor and able to write academic thesis as proven in his physics publications: http://www.physics.uiowa.edu/~cgrabbe/writing/research.html Further from your insult, NIST refuse to give out any of the critical specifications; such as blueprints and Protec photograph and video of the debris field. So even if he was Professor of Engineering he would not be able to comment as a Professional Engineer becuase he wouldn't have access to the necessary information. Yes thats right, Guliani order the expediant clean up of WTC7 and none of the assigned forensic engineers even got to analyse the debris as per normal due process. Don't believe me? Why don't you see the forensic engineers themselves testify in this History Channel piece on WTC7: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TVSxeJH_RCY > A > professor of physics, not engineering, who claims that explosives were > planted in not only WTC7, but WTC 1 and 2 which were trigged by the > planes impacting the building. > > Why is anyone listening to this loon? > > > > > If Feynman were alive, he would point his finger straight at the 911 > > criminal operators, the yank bastards themselves ... > > I don't recall Feynman ever advocating nutcase positions. > > > > >http://www.911blogger.com/node/8101 > > > No self-respecting scientist should keep his mouth shut. Its a > > fundamental challenge to the method of science, a detective work most > > demanding of INTELLECTUAL HONESTY. > > I love how folks like you ask for intellectual honesty when every > effort is made to ignore evidence that doesn't agree with your > presupposed findings. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: The odius and RACISTS WASPS of FBI can ONLY STING FOOLISH PATSIES, When will these INCOMPETENTOS catch the YANK ANTHRAX MAILER ? Re: *** Secret Technical Papers, dont tell the FBI ***
Interesting. You forgot to mention the Zionists. And therefore your post has been discounted as Zionist disinformation. On 9 maio, 21:14, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > The ODIOUS WASPs of FBI (FEDERAL BUREAU OF INCOMPETENCE) can ONLY S-T- > I-N-G. > > WASPS ONLY STING > WASPS ONLY STING > > The fact is that the ANTHRAX mailer was a WASP BASTARD being covered > up by the YANK Bastards at FBI. Mueller is DAMN Incompetent and > Coward. Bush's Crimes against the Nation tower far higher than those > of NIXON. Long time ago, when FBI had a competent and PATRIOTIC chief, > he was able to get the NIXON BASTARD out of the office and exiled to > China. > > If I found out some five FOOLISH PATSIES, Immigrants under mental or > social imbalance were planning a STUPID and IDIOTIC operation, I would > confront them with courtesy. I would tell them that this is a foolish > act. That I, a white FBI officer am doing them a favor out of the > goodness of my heart to not do such a foolish thing and give the YANK > SOBs an excuse for genocide and stealing their oil wealth by PERPETUAL > WAR of FAKE and SYNTHETIC TERROR. > > Thats how a good school master would confront a few stupid kids and > that is the way to solve this problem. > > On the other hand, a HEINOUS and RACIST crime was committed in 911 > CONTROLLED DEMOLITION as well as mailing those FAKE "Allah" letters > with GENUINE ANTHRAX through out the country by a yank motherfucker > related to the NATIONAL LABS and the ANGLO-SAXON-ZIONIST > ESTABLISHMENT. > > On May 9, 4:32 pm, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > > Can anyone upload these seminal papers on the internet? Send them to > > City police chiefs, City officials, Mayors, Congressmen, District > > Judges, Federal Judges, Supreme court judges, FBI Incompetentos, CIA > > Bastards, Opus Dei, The Pope, Hollywood, President Vladimir Putin, > > Hugo Chavez, Dr. Fidel Castro Ruz, and of course the odius SMIRK and > > his VICE. Also dont forget to forward a copy to Wolfowitz and Shaha > > Riza (his highly paid persian prostitute). Send one copy also to the > > Madame who has caught the Washington officials by their balls. > > >http://www.sciencedirect.com/science?_ob=PublicationURL&_tockey=%23TO... > > > Research in Political Economy > > Copyright © 2007 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved > > > The Hidden History of 9-11-2001 > > Edited by: Paul Zarembka > > ISBN: 978-0-7623-1305-1 > > Paul Zarembka > > Part I: Hijackers - Who Were They? > > Pages 3-45 > > Jay Kolar > > > Inconsistencies and contradictions in the US government's story of > > hijackers and their masterminds are examined to account for what > > happened on 9-11. A little-known initial FBI list of 19, scrutinized > > for four names not on its final list, calls into question the FBI > > naming process. We discovered 11 of the FBI-named finalists could not > > have been on those planes, with 10 still alive and another's identity > > improvised by a double. The Dulles videotape, essentially the > > government's case that hijackers boarded the 9-11 flights, is found to > > have serious problems including authentication, as does the so-called > > bin Laden "confession" video. > > > Were "hijackers" known to be in the US before intelligence alleges it > > knew? Evidence is examined which shows that they were closely > > monitored by agencies which denied this knowledge; in particular, an > > undercover FBI agent lived with them the prior year. > > > Noting government refusal to disclose evidence called for by > > investigators, we find some pieces altered or fabricated and others > > confiscated or destroyed. Other revelations point to hijackers with > > national security overrides, protection in their alternate roles as > > drug traffickers, and deep political connections with government > > elites. We investigate patterns, reminiscent of historical > > intelligence involvement, revealing the presence of a covert > > intelligence operation disguised as an outside enemy attack. > > > Part II: The Morning of 9-11-2001 > > You are not entitled to access the full text of this document 4. > > Initiation of the 9-11 Operation, with Evidence of Insider Trading > > Beforehand > > Pages 49-77 > > Paul Zarembka > > Abstract | Full Text + Links | PDF (216 K) |To Purchase and Download > > the Full Article, Click PDF > > > This chapter first examines evidence concerning departures of the four > > flights out of Boston, D.C., and Newark, including identifications of > > the aircrafts involved, some evidence regarding the flight paths, and > > then the hijackings. Alleged video evidence at airports for the > > hijackers themselves is examined, but found to be unacceptable. > > > The fact of a conspiracy is uncontested by all. Three alternative > > conspiracy possibilities regarding the planes are examined: the > > 'official' one of suicide hijackers skillfully guiding planes with > > steeled determination into targets (independent of the hijackers' > > identities); us
