Home ยป IMPORTANT ALERT! Steven Jones Jumps the Shark - Neither He Nor Glenn Beck Speak for the 9/11 Truth Movement

casseia's picture

You sound like you're channeling Jon Gold

Submitted by casseia on Thu, 2010-12-16 03:46.

It doesn't take much general scientific knowledge (i.e., the amount you would get with any decent college education) for two things.
1) To be able to follow the high school level physics that inform a David Chandler-style analysis of observable events -- that is, the "collapses" had energy added.
2) To understand the peer-review process enough to recognize a difference between the possibility of a paper being contradicted by further research and a nefarious honey pot ploy.

The problem has been, and continues to be, focusing on a mechanism for the collapse rather than the observable nature of the collapses themselves. (Collapse, destruction, you know what I'm talking about.) A theory that is floated about the mechanism for the explosive demolitions may be floated and later invalidated -- this does NOTHING to the crucial underlying fact that the destruction was observably not caused by gravity and plane damage alone.

»

Reply