I understand why people would, at first glance think this is a rather well formulated comment by prof Jones, but I have to say, it's a little disturbing to me.

I wrote something about it on my site, and I would like you all to consider my argument.

Now that Jones has seen fit to take his "comment" left on the thread about his work and post it to the front page of 911 Blather, that just reinforces what I was saying before he did that.

He is in a sense telling Truth advocates what they should think and say, in no uncertain terms. He is actually saying (not implying or inferring, but saying) that the Truth movement is NOW our of the realm of "Bigfoot and Elvis sightings" stories. All because of HIS work?

what does that say about other works that aren't "peer reviewed"? Well, according to Jones, they aren't "serious".

Isn't this the same thing the debunkers were trying to say about his work that we all supported in the past? Isn't this the same thing they try to say about almost everything we do?

We shouldn't NEED someone telling us what to focus on or what to SAY about his article. He should have posted it and then left it for us to consider on it's own merits. But if you go to that article on Blather, he is the most frequent commenter, carefully scripting and guiding the discussion about it. Yet I don't see him spending time at ATS or JREF going after the scientific evaluations of his work. instead he is spending his time with us? Telling us what to say and what to think about his work?

He also has repeated many times that we should avoid discussing HOW this material could have been used and focus on WHO MADE IT?

Why is that? Does an investigator stop looking at how the suspect set the fires to focus on who made the matches?

Something isn't right here people. and Hoffman's "Hypothetical Demolition Theory" was down-right laughable. I have already got him to change at least 2 things about his theory, but it is rather stunning in it's unbelievability.

Factor in the fact that Hoffman attacks any reasonable discussion about what happened at the Pentagon with "evidence" from the FBI prosecution of the 20th hijacker, and you start to see a rather interesting picture develop.

Please check out what I wrote about the Jones decree...

http://willyloman.wordpress.com/2009/04/07/the-good-prof-jones-now-tells...

"The future is not inherited, it is achieved." JFK