ISF Logo   IS Forum
Forum Index Register Members List Events Mark Forums Read Help

Go Back   International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Conspiracies and Conspiracy Theories » 9/11 Conspiracy Theories
 


Welcome to the International Skeptics Forum, where we discuss skepticism, critical thinking, the paranormal and science in a friendly but lively way. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest, which means you are missing out on discussing matters that are of interest to you. Please consider registering so you can gain full use of the forum features and interact with other Members. Registration is simple, fast and free! Click here to register today.
Tags Bentham journals

Reply
Old 13th December 2010, 01:52 PM   #1
grandmastershek
Graduate Poster
 
grandmastershek's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 1,443
2nd Open Chemical Physics Editor in Chief Resigns

"...in no way do i agree with its conclusions. In fact i do not even know how the paper's peer reviewing was handled - or if it was reviewed at all. The journal never wanted to disclosed this matter to me...What may be even worse - noone seems to be at the helm of this Journal. Months ago -simply after becoming acquainted with the article you mention, its possible misshandling, etc- i submitted my immediate resignation as editor to the open chemical physics journal."

http://activistteacher.blogspot.com/

Thats not only the 2nd Editor in Chief, but #5 total of people resigning from Bentham due to their non standards.

1. Lucio Frydman
2. Marie Paule Pileni
3.Bambang Parmanto
4. Marc Williams
5. John Furedy
__________________
For as the NWO are higher than the people, so are their ways higher than your ways, and their thoughts than your thoughts. (A amalgam of Isaiah 55:9 & truther logic)
grandmastershek is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 13th December 2010, 02:01 PM   #2
The Big Dog
Penultimate Amazing
 
The Big Dog's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 16,347
Jonesy admitted in the last couple of weeks that one of the "peer reviewers" was a noted truther wackamole and all around crack pot David L. Griscom of the "passengers were in on it" theory.

hilarious! That article was so incompetent, it actually killed the freaking Journal.
__________________
Livin' on the edge / You can't help yourself from fallin' / Livin' on the edge / You can't help yourself from fallin'
The Big Dog is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 13th December 2010, 03:43 PM   #3
grandmastershek
Graduate Poster
 
grandmastershek's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 1,443
Originally Posted by 16.5 View Post
Jonesy admitted in the last couple of weeks that one of the "peer reviewers" was a noted truther wackamole and all around crack pot David L. Griscom of the "passengers were in on it" theory.

hilarious! That article was so incompetent, it actually killed the freaking Journal.
Actually Jones states on blogger that he had no idea of Griscom's involvement in the "movement" in spite of Gris being "published" in the J.O.N.E.S.
__________________
For as the NWO are higher than the people, so are their ways higher than your ways, and their thoughts than your thoughts. (A amalgam of Isaiah 55:9 & truther logic)
grandmastershek is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 13th December 2010, 04:45 PM   #4
The Big Dog
Penultimate Amazing
 
The Big Dog's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 16,347
Originally Posted by grandmastershek View Post
Actually Jones states on blogger that he had no idea of Griscom's involvement in the "movement" in spite of Gris being "published" in the J.O.N.E.S.
Hee hee! Really?

WOW.
__________________
Livin' on the edge / You can't help yourself from fallin' / Livin' on the edge / You can't help yourself from fallin'
The Big Dog is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 13th December 2010, 07:56 PM   #5
grandmastershek
Graduate Poster
 
grandmastershek's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 1,443
Originally Posted by 16.5 View Post
Hee hee! Really?

WOW.
Had to reread it, but its not exactly what he said.

"I wish to extend a warm welcome to Prof. Griscom to the 9/11 truth-seeking community, as he speaks out in his blog."
http://911blogger.com/news/2010-12-0...-himself-great

Why welcome someone if you know they are already involved?

http://www.journalof911studies.com/l...id-griscom.pdf

Someone on blogger called him out as to whether or not Jones suggested Griscom as a reviewer and he dodged it. After further prodding Jones got quite indignant, especially after the poster pointed out that they listed Griscom in the acknowledgements of the paper.
__________________
For as the NWO are higher than the people, so are their ways higher than your ways, and their thoughts than your thoughts. (A amalgam of Isaiah 55:9 & truther logic)

Last edited by grandmastershek; 13th December 2010 at 08:21 PM.
grandmastershek is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 13th December 2010, 08:58 PM   #6
The Big Dog
Penultimate Amazing
 
The Big Dog's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 16,347
Originally Posted by grandmastershek View Post
Someone on blogger called him out as to whether or not Jones suggested Griscom as a reviewer and he dodged it. After further prodding Jones got quite indignant, especially after the poster pointed out that they listed Griscom in the acknowledgements of the paper.
Jones is pathological. He previously admitted that he gave a list of proposed peer reviewers to the late great Bentham Open Journal.

Given the list of acknowledgments, I have to assume that Mark Brasile was the second "peer reviewer."
__________________
Livin' on the edge / You can't help yourself from fallin' / Livin' on the edge / You can't help yourself from fallin'

Last edited by The Big Dog; 13th December 2010 at 09:00 PM.
The Big Dog is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 14th December 2010, 05:51 AM   #7
Oystein
Penultimate Amazing
 
Oystein's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 13,226
Originally Posted by grandmastershek View Post
...

Why welcome someone if you know they are already involved?

http://www.journalof911studies.com/l...id-griscom.pdf

...

hahaha!
From that letter by Griscom on JONES (his own bolding!):
Quote:
Mercifully, we normally publish in refereed journals, where some of our inevitable mistakes are caught by anonymous peer reviewers prior to publication. Nevertheless, referees tend to be too busy to catch every error, so mistakes can still leak into print. I have made a horrendous number of mistakes in the process of publishing the 108 papers that I wrote fully myself. I know this because I’ve caught virtually all of them myself by double-, triple-, and quadruple-checking my data, logic, and mathematics before allowing my manuscripts to go to press.
Anonymous peer reviewers - anonymous to whom??
Oystein is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 14th December 2010, 08:31 AM   #8
Josarhus
Thinker
 
Josarhus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Aarhus, Denmark
Posts: 202
Originally Posted by 16.5 View Post
Jones is pathological. He previously admitted that he gave a list of proposed peer reviewers to the late great Bentham Open Journal.

Given the list of acknowledgments, I have to assume that Mark Brasile was the second "peer reviewer."
That might be spot on!

I have asked one of Harrits fellow truthers here in Denmark, whom the two reviewers were and after several attempts he listed Mark Basile and Jeffrey Farrer as the two reviewers.

It’s unclear why he mentions these two, either that was his best answer, since Harrit is keeping it a secret, not only from the public, but also from his friends in the truth movement, or he actually knows something on this matter.
__________________
Niels Harrit: "I do not actually understand why they fire insulates steel structures. It just slows the heating of the steel by one hour. There must be money in it."
Josarhus is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 14th December 2010, 08:38 AM   #9
Dave Rogers
Bandaged ice that stampedes inexpensively through a scribbled morning waving necessary ankles
 
Dave Rogers's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Cair Paravel, according to XKCD
Posts: 22,283
Originally Posted by Josarhus View Post
I have asked one of Harrits fellow truthers here in Denmark, whom the two reviewers were and after several attempts he listed Mark Basile and Jeffrey Farrer as the two reviewers.
Hang on a moment. Is there a typo in there, or are you suggesting that Jeffrey Farrer was both an author and a peer reviewer of the paper?

If so, that's the most flagrant abuse of the peer review process possible.

Dave
__________________
Me: So what you're saying is that, if the load carrying ability of the lower structure is reduced to the point where it can no longer support the load above it, it will collapse without a jolt, right?

Tony Szamboti: That is right
Dave Rogers is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 14th December 2010, 08:47 AM   #10
ElMondoHummus
0.25 short of being half-witted
 
ElMondoHummus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Somewhere north of the South Pole
Posts: 12,257
Originally Posted by Dave Rogers View Post
Hang on a moment. Is there a typo in there, or are you suggesting that Jeffrey Farrer was both an author and a peer reviewer of the paper?

If so, that's the most flagrant abuse of the peer review process possible.

Dave
Agreed. If this is true - note: Conditional statement - then that's just insane. That would go beyond abuse into outright deception about the trustworthiness of the publication process (not that there's not already ample evidence denigrating that already , evidence completely independent of this issue).

I would love to hear if there's any confirmation or refutation of this. It's necessary to know more before passing judgement on this specific issue.

------

ETA: Oh, BTW, I did notice that this was not directly from Harrit himself, but from "one of Harrits fellow truthers...". So to be fair, I do want to temper my post with the acknowledgement that this is currently hearsay. Again, we simply need to know more. But that said, the fact that this consideration is even possible, given what we already know of Bentham's practices, that speaks ill of Bentham's reputation, as well as the decisionmaking behind publishing that work with them.
__________________
"AND ZEPPELINS!!! We haven't even begun to talk about Zeppelins yet! Marauding inflatable Teutonic johnsons waggling their way across the sky! Indecent and flammable all at once."

Last edited by ElMondoHummus; 14th December 2010 at 08:50 AM.
ElMondoHummus is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 14th December 2010, 10:42 AM   #11
R.Mackey
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 7,854
Originally Posted by Dave Rogers View Post
Hang on a moment. Is there a typo in there, or are you suggesting that Jeffrey Farrer was both an author and a peer reviewer of the paper?

If so, that's the most flagrant abuse of the peer review process possible.

Dave
... and both David Griscom and Mark Basile, while not co-authors, are acknowledged in the paper.

Griscom's name alone destroys Bentham's credibility forever. Waiting for confirmation of the other two to see if we have a trifecta of fail.
R.Mackey is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 14th December 2010, 12:32 PM   #12
Josarhus
Thinker
 
Josarhus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Aarhus, Denmark
Posts: 202
Originally Posted by Dave Rogers View Post
Hang on a moment. Is there a typo in there, or are you suggesting that Jeffrey Farrer was both an author and a peer reviewer of the paper?

If so, that's the most flagrant abuse of the peer review process possible.

Dave

I think that he finally realised what implications his “information” would do to Harrits paper and firstly he tried to dodge further questions by implying that any scholar who have read the paper and who endorse it is a peer reviewer, and that was why he mentioned Basile and Farrer.

I asked if scholars who have read the paper and who do not endorse it could be considered a peer reviewer, and apparently he thinks that ONLY scholars who agree with the paper can be considered peer reviewers.

After that he disappeared from the debate.

He is from Harrits inner circle in the Danish truth movement.
__________________
Niels Harrit: "I do not actually understand why they fire insulates steel structures. It just slows the heating of the steel by one hour. There must be money in it."
Josarhus is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 14th December 2010, 04:08 PM   #13
Oystein
Penultimate Amazing
 
Oystein's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 13,226
Originally Posted by Josarhus View Post
.... and apparently he thinks that ONLY scholars who agree with the paper can be considered peer reviewers.

After that he disappeared from the debate.

He is from Harrits inner circle in the Danish truth movement.
Who is "he"? Got a name?
Oystein is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 15th December 2010, 06:58 PM   #14
beachnut
Penultimate Amazing
 
beachnut's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Dog House
Posts: 24,347
David L Griscom? He makes up moronic conspiracies, no wonder he was fooled by Jones' fake paper. http://impactglassman.blogspot.com/s...&max-results=3
beachnut is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 16th December 2010, 08:00 AM   #15
Edx
Philosopher
 
Edx's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 5,641
That blog is interesting, he says he thinks the Truth Movement are a good thing, but then argues against all the demolition theories. I would say he is a truther on the way out the door
Edx is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 16th December 2010, 09:22 AM   #16
Dave Rogers
Bandaged ice that stampedes inexpensively through a scribbled morning waving necessary ankles
 
Dave Rogers's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Cair Paravel, according to XKCD
Posts: 22,283
Originally Posted by Edx View Post
That blog is interesting, he says he thinks the Truth Movement are a good thing, but then argues against all the demolition theories. I would say he is a truther on the way out the door
You may also have noticed that he was rude enough to publish Frydman's private e-mail to him, and not only to refuse when asked to remove it, but to publish Frydman's request. He may be having his doubts, but he certainly hasn't departed from the usual truther level of misplaced arrogance.

Dave
__________________
Me: So what you're saying is that, if the load carrying ability of the lower structure is reduced to the point where it can no longer support the load above it, it will collapse without a jolt, right?

Tony Szamboti: That is right
Dave Rogers is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 16th December 2010, 09:28 AM   #17
Edx
Philosopher
 
Edx's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 5,641
Originally Posted by Dave Rogers View Post
You may also have noticed that he was rude enough to publish Frydman's private e-mail to him, and not only to refuse when asked to remove it, but to publish Frydman's request. He may be having his doubts, but he certainly hasn't departed from the usual truther level of misplaced arrogance.

Dave
Yea, well I put a comment on his blog and I'll see what he says.

He also still believes WTC7 was a demolition, but it was interesting to hear the debate/discussion between him and Barrett.

I may have been too optimistic about him being on the way out, I guess he could just stay in this middle ground.
Edx is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 16th December 2010, 09:47 AM   #18
Brainster
Penultimate Amazing
 
Brainster's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 13,693
Originally Posted by grandmastershek View Post
Actually Jones states on blogger that he had no idea of Griscom's involvement in the "movement" in spite of Gris being "published" in the J.O.N.E.S.
And of course in spite of Jones pimping Griscom and his "paper" a few years ago:

YouTube Video This video is not hosted by the ISF. The ISF can not be held responsible for the suitability or legality of this material. By clicking the link below you agree to view content from an external website.
I AGREE
__________________
My new blog: Recent Reads.
1960s Comic Book Nostalgia
Visit the Screw Loose Change blog.
Brainster is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 16th December 2010, 10:33 AM   #19
Dave Rogers
Bandaged ice that stampedes inexpensively through a scribbled morning waving necessary ankles
 
Dave Rogers's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Cair Paravel, according to XKCD
Posts: 22,283
Originally Posted by Brainster View Post
And of course in spite of Jones pimping Griscom and his "paper" a few years ago:
Gosh, you're not suggesting that Steven Jones lied about not knowing Griscom was a truther, are you? How shocking!

Dave
__________________
Me: So what you're saying is that, if the load carrying ability of the lower structure is reduced to the point where it can no longer support the load above it, it will collapse without a jolt, right?

Tony Szamboti: That is right
Dave Rogers is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 16th December 2010, 07:13 PM   #20
grandmastershek
Graduate Poster
 
grandmastershek's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 1,443
Originally Posted by Brainster View Post
And of course in spite of Jones pimping Griscom and his "paper" a few years ago:

YouTube Video This video is not hosted by the ISF. The ISF can not be held responsible for the suitability or legality of this material. By clicking the link below you agree to view content from an external website.
I AGREE
ROFLMAO!!!!

What a lying d-bag.
__________________
For as the NWO are higher than the people, so are their ways higher than your ways, and their thoughts than your thoughts. (A amalgam of Isaiah 55:9 & truther logic)
grandmastershek is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 16th December 2010, 08:14 PM   #21
R.Mackey
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 7,854
The thing I find funny / pathetic about this whole episode is this:

For years now (yes, years) anyone with even a modicum of science or attention span has known this paper is total crap. There's been about 500 pages of discussion on this Forum alone, and dozens of reasons why it's nonsense. There's been no serious attempt at replication of results. It's an absolute cipher and has been all along.

But now, it's another Truther whose noticed the glaring faults in it. So now, all of a sudden, the other Truthers are finally wising up.

I don't know which is worse -- the inherent narcissism of Truthers as a whole, or the fact that it took them this long to understand the paper's flaws even after we've literally shoved it up their noses.
R.Mackey is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 16th December 2010, 09:42 PM   #22
Orphia Nay
Penguilicious Spodmaster.
Tagger
 
Orphia Nay's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Ponylandistan Presidential Palace (above the Spods' stables).
Posts: 35,970
Originally Posted by grandmastershek View Post
"...in no way do i agree with its conclusions. In fact i do not even know how the paper's peer reviewing was handled - or if it was reviewed at all. The journal never wanted to disclosed this matter to me...What may be even worse - noone seems to be at the helm of this Journal. Months ago -simply after becoming acquainted with the article you mention, its possible misshandling, etc- i submitted my immediate resignation as editor to the open chemical physics journal."

http://activistteacher.blogspot.com/

Thats not only the 2nd Editor in Chief, but #5 total of people resigning from Bentham due to their non standards.

1. Lucio Frydman
2. Marie Paule Pileni
3.Bambang Parmanto
4. Marc Williams
5. John Furedy
Link to the blog post in question, for posterity's sake:
http://activistteacher.blogspot.com/...harrit-et.html

Could some kind person post links to the other editors' resignation announcements?

I note that Frydman has objected (with good reason) to his private email being published. While it may be embarrassing for him to have been associated with the journal, he has done a good thing by resigning, and the news of said resignation benefits the scientific community.
__________________
Challenge your thoughts.
Don't believe everything you think.
Orphia Nay is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 17th December 2010, 10:15 AM   #23
grandmastershek
Graduate Poster
 
grandmastershek's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 1,443
Originally Posted by Orphia Nay View Post
Link to the blog post in question, for posterity's sake:
http://activistteacher.blogspot.com/...harrit-et.html

Could some kind person post links to the other editors' resignation announcements?

I note that Frydman has objected (with good reason) to his private email being published. While it may be embarrassing for him to have been associated with the journal, he has done a good thing by resigning, and the news of said resignation benefits the scientific community.
The only reputable source I know of is a danish newspaper:

http://videnskab.dk/content/dk/natur...artikel_om_911

The rest are 9/11 blogger's articles who claim that Marie Pileni Paule was lying about not being an expert because since nanothermite is explosive (cuz Jones says so) she must be lying.
__________________
For as the NWO are higher than the people, so are their ways higher than your ways, and their thoughts than your thoughts. (A amalgam of Isaiah 55:9 & truther logic)
grandmastershek is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 17th December 2010, 10:46 AM   #24
Brainster
Penultimate Amazing
 
Brainster's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 13,693
Originally Posted by grandmastershek View Post
The only reputable source I know of is a danish newspaper:

http://videnskab.dk/content/dk/natur...artikel_om_911

The rest are 9/11 blogger's articles who claim that Marie Pileni Paule was lying about not being an expert because since nanothermite is explosive (cuz Jones says so) she must be lying.
Translation from the Danish by one of our commenters here.
__________________
My new blog: Recent Reads.
1960s Comic Book Nostalgia
Visit the Screw Loose Change blog.
Brainster is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 17th December 2010, 10:52 AM   #25
Panoply_Prefect
Graduate Poster
 
Panoply_Prefect's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Sweden
Posts: 1,075
Just for the record, one of the two swedes on the editorial advisory board also resigned when I asked him about the publishing of Harrits paper (I couldn't get in touch with the other swede). According to videnskap.dk, same did Harrits superior at the University, Nils O. Andersen who was on the same board (although he says it had nothing to do with Harrits paper).

But do I understand it correctly, that people mentioned as authors of the paper, were also peer-reviewing them?

Last edited by Panoply_Prefect; 17th December 2010 at 11:08 AM.
Panoply_Prefect is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 4th January 2011, 02:29 PM   #26
Edx
Philosopher
 
Edx's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 5,641
bump.

Whats the earliest date we have for involvement from Grisom in the truth movement and a source if possible?

Also what date was the nano thermite paper published in Bentham?
Edx is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 4th January 2011, 03:38 PM   #27
MikeW
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 1,910
Originally Posted by Edx View Post
Whats the earliest date we have for involvement from Grisom in the truth movement and a source if possible?
He has a blog piece on January 2007 at http://impactglassman.blogspot.com/2...cs-of-911.html
MikeW is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 4th January 2011, 04:05 PM   #28
grandmastershek
Graduate Poster
 
grandmastershek's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 1,443
Originally Posted by Edx View Post
bump.

Whats the earliest date we have for involvement from Grisom in the truth movement and a source if possible?

Also what date was the nano thermite paper published in Bentham?
He also has a letter in the Jo911S from 2/07. The NT paper was "published" in April of 09 IIRC. A dip on youtube recently tried to tell me that Gris became a truther after reviewing the paper. I of course pointed out Jones was still collecting samples up to 11/07 after Gris was first featured in Jones' "journal". Make it up as you go I guess. He has has been dancing around the fact that the Bentham peer review process was negligible at best.
__________________
For as the NWO are higher than the people, so are their ways higher than your ways, and their thoughts than your thoughts. (A amalgam of Isaiah 55:9 & truther logic)

Last edited by grandmastershek; 4th January 2011 at 04:08 PM.
grandmastershek is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 4th January 2011, 05:35 PM   #29
Edx
Philosopher
 
Edx's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 5,641
Guess what a truther replied to on this youtube video with. The first underlined part is a quote from my comment.



Its amazing how that guy can just lie so easily, but I do wonder if even the claim that Griscom didn't mention thermite before the 911 paper was published is true. Anyone know?
Edx is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 4th January 2011, 05:46 PM   #30
9/11 Chewy Defense
Banned
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 3,593
Originally Posted by Edx View Post
Guess what a truther replied to on this youtube video with. The first underlined part is a quote from my comment.

http://img259.imageshack.us/img259/4...longriscom.png

Its amazing how that guy can just lie so easily, but I do wonder if even the claim that Griscom didn't mention thermite before the 911 paper was published is true. Anyone know?
Damn, I can't reply to that video: You have been blocked by the owner of this video.

I wanted to say: "Wow, you were right TheSkepticalIdealist, Sexy Melon is a liar. Keep making him dodge your facts & evidence. The more you do it, the more he/she will squeal."
9/11 Chewy Defense is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th January 2011, 07:21 AM   #31
MikeW
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 1,910
Originally Posted by Edx View Post
Its amazing how that guy can just lie so easily, but I do wonder if even the claim that Griscom didn't mention thermite before the 911 paper was published is true. Anyone know?
Griscom's 2007 piece contains this:

Quote:
But there IS one way that all 250 some columns could have lost all strength simultaneously. It's called CONTROLLED DEMOLITION.

David Ray Griffin has web-published a splendid, highly footnoted account of “The Destruction of the World Trade Center: Why the Official Account Cannot Be True”:

http://911review.com/articles/griffi...ltipleevidence

This scholarly work, rich in eyewitness accounts, includes 11 separate pieces of evidence that the World Trade Center towers 1, 2, and 7 were brought down by explosives.
http://impactglassman.blogspot.com/2...cs-of-911.html
It doesn't specifically reference thermite, but it's clear that he's ready to accept the idea.
MikeW is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th January 2011, 08:09 AM   #32
grandmastershek
Graduate Poster
 
grandmastershek's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 1,443
Originally Posted by Edx View Post
Guess what a truther replied to on this youtube video with. The first underlined part is a quote from my comment.

http://img259.imageshack.us/img259/4...longriscom.png

Its amazing how that guy can just lie so easily, but I do wonder if even the claim that Griscom didn't mention thermite before the 911 paper was published is true. Anyone know?
Melon is a plain liar.

Originally Posted by grandmastershek View Post
A dip [Sexy Melon] on youtube recently tried to tell me that Gris became a truther after reviewing the paper. I of course pointed out Jones was still collecting samples up to 11/07 after Gris was first featured in Jones' "journal". Make it up as you go I guess. He has has been dancing around the fact that the Bentham peer review process was negligible at best.
__________________
For as the NWO are higher than the people, so are their ways higher than your ways, and their thoughts than your thoughts. (A amalgam of Isaiah 55:9 & truther logic)

Last edited by grandmastershek; 5th January 2011 at 08:11 AM.
grandmastershek is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th January 2011, 11:52 AM   #33
grandmastershek
Graduate Poster
 
grandmastershek's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 1,443
A good approach might be to ask Melon if nanothermite is an explosive. I am pretty sure I have seen him say as such; in fact I know he does because he told me the spike in Jones's calorimetry was evidence it is and then I showed him another spike from another study of regular thermite and he just pissed and moaned that he couldn't get access to the whole article even though I provided the citation. Point being, in Gris's Jo9/11S article he supports the demo by explosive hypothesis. If Melon was a rational person he would either have to abandon that NT is an explosive or concede that he was biased ahead of time. But as I am sure cognitive dissonance will kick in, and he will do the cha cha of twoof.

Not to mention Griscom is acknowledged in said paper on none other than alleged nanothermite. Get ready for some hoop jumping!
__________________
For as the NWO are higher than the people, so are their ways higher than your ways, and their thoughts than your thoughts. (A amalgam of Isaiah 55:9 & truther logic)

Last edited by grandmastershek; 5th January 2011 at 11:57 AM.
grandmastershek is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Reply

International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Conspiracies and Conspiracy Theories » 9/11 Conspiracy Theories

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 01:20 PM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2016, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
© 2014, TribeTech AB. All Rights Reserved.
This forum began as part of the James Randi Education Foundation (JREF). However, the forum now exists as
an independent entity with no affiliation with or endorsement by the JREF, including the section in reference to "JREF" topics.

Disclaimer: Messages posted in the Forum are solely the opinion of their authors.