Peak Oil
Donate Bitcoin

Donate Paypal


PeakOil is You

PeakOil is You

Book: "Debunking 9 / 11 Debunking" by David R Griffin

A forum to either submit your own review of a book, video or audio interview, or to post reviews by others.
Post a reply

Re: "Debunking..."

Unread postby Carlhole » Sat 12 May 2007, 12:19:49

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('PraiseDoom', '[')You'll forgive me for getting tired after reading down through the bio's of the first 16 and not finding much in the way of science, engineering, or anything to do with demolition or whatever else might be pertinent to the conversion of religious experts versus structural engineers and such.


This issue is being forced out of the closet.

A detailed plans of one of the World Trade Center towers is now public information. Soon sophisticated computer models will become all the rage - because this subject is THAT interesting.

Zeitgeist is building for exploration and analysis of the 911 events.
When people come close to the 911 issue, they find that it stinks like something died there.
Carlhole
 
Top

Re: "Debunking..."

Unread postby billg » Sat 12 May 2007, 13:00:48

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('PraiseDoom', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('billg', 'H')ere is a list of 25 "experts" in the mathematical, science, and engineering fields who question the official account of 911. Scroll down a bit.

http://patriotsquestion911.com/professors.html#Griscom


Did you read your own list? Let the counts begin!

religion/feminine religion/theology 13
comp sci 1
philosophy 1
liberal arts 1

You'll forgive me for getting tired after reading down through the bio's of the first 16 and not finding much in the way of science, engineering, or anything to do with demolition or whatever else might be pertinent to the conversion of religious experts versus structural engineers and such.


You didn't scroll down to the science section.
billg
Tar Sands
Tar Sands
 
Posts: 803
Joined: Sun 17 Sep 2006, 03:00:00
Location: No man's land
Top

Re: "Debunking..."

Unread postby Carlhole » Sat 12 May 2007, 15:45:48

The Journal Times

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('The Journal', '[')b]They're speaking out about 9/11 -- every month

By Janine Anderson

Racine, WI -On the 11th of every month Dan Lemut will be standing somewhere, trying to spread his message to anyone who will listen.

Lemut, of Caledonia, does not believe the official story about what happened on Sept. 11, 2001.

"I'm here today to get the word out that there's more the 9/11 than what you see on the nightly news," he said.

Lemut started watching online documentaries about Sept. 11 and thought they were raising important questions. He wonders about how quickly some of the buildings came down. One theory is that explosives had been planted in the buildings and that they were demolished on purpose.

"We want to get the word out that we need to look at it more closely," he said.

The sign he carried above his head read "Investigate 9/11." His companions carried posters that read: "Stop the 9/11 coverup," "9/11 was an inside job," and "Ask questions. Demand answers. Seek 9-11 truth."

One out of every few cars would honk at the group. Lemut said he hopes that people see them out there and ask their own questions.

He said he is not out to upset people, but to inform them.

"I'm somewhat concerned about people being upset," he said. "It's worth the risk. This is important. I don't want to make anybody angry, but the truth does that sometimes."

For more information on Lemut's beliefs, visit:

http://www.patriotchurch.org
Carlhole
 
Top

Re: "Debunking..."

Unread postby Carlhole » Sat 12 May 2007, 16:35:17

Cindy Sheehan and Morgan Stack on Jack Blood - Cindy comes out strong for 9/11 Truth

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Jack Blood Radio Show', 'C')indy's words on 9/11 truth are the strongest I've heard from her to date (first few minutes of the second clip below.)

Everyone should throw some support behind Morgan Stack's campaign at http://www.911truth.ie/.

The following is from Morgan Stack's most recent email.

The interview from last night (Fri May 11th) is all hour two - apart from the first ten minutes which is Cindy Sheahan.

Deadline Live with Jack Blood.

http://www.911truth.ie/Audio/051107JackBlood1.mp3

http://www.911truth.ie/Audio/051107JackBlood2.mp3


Jack's got the perfect soundtrack for this thread.
Carlhole
 
Top

Re: "Debunking..."

Unread postby threadbear » Sat 12 May 2007, 16:41:27

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('PraiseDoom', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('threadbear', '
')
And btw, Sh**head...I'll take the remarks of a sincere Presbyterian theologian over a bought and paid for structural engineer, any day.


Its a free country.....and I disagree.

We all buy into our favorite brand of dogma...nothing wrong with that.


Yes, it's a free country. You're free to express your obsequiousness to authority and I'm free to call you on it. Then you're free to do a wounded little bird act, and I'm free to laugh my head off.
User avatar
threadbear
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 7577
Joined: Sat 22 Jan 2005, 04:00:00
Top

Re: "Debunking..."

Unread postby PraiseDoom » Sat 12 May 2007, 20:48:39

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('threadbear', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('PraiseDoom', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('threadbear', '
')
And btw, Sh**head...I'll take the remarks of a sincere Presbyterian theologian over a bought and paid for structural engineer, any day.


Its a free country.....and I disagree.

We all buy into our favorite brand of dogma...nothing wrong with that.


Yes, it's a free country. You're free to express your obsequiousness to authority and I'm free to call you on it. Then you're free to do a wounded little bird act, and I'm free to laugh my head off.


Being a newby here, I can't say I know what you mean about a "wounded little bird" act.

You are free to insist that religious experts know something about demolition from their years of experience in the field, but please don't assume that kowtowing to authority is somehow inherent with someone noticing the obvious...that demolition experts and structural and civil engineers with experience in the subject at hand know more about the subject than a theologian.
User avatar
PraiseDoom
Lignite
Lignite
 
Posts: 289
Joined: Mon 23 Apr 2007, 03:00:00
Top

Re: "Debunking..."

Unread postby Zentric » Sat 12 May 2007, 21:46:23

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('PraiseDoom', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('threadbear', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('PraiseDoom', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('threadbear', '
')
And btw, Sh**head...I'll take the remarks of a sincere Presbyterian theologian over a bought and paid for structural engineer, any day.


Its a free country.....and I disagree.

We all buy into our favorite brand of dogma...nothing wrong with that.


Yes, it's a free country. You're free to express your obsequiousness to authority and I'm free to call you on it. Then you're free to do a wounded little bird act, and I'm free to laugh my head off.


Being a newby here, I can't say I know what you mean about a "wounded little bird" act.

You are free to insist that religious experts know something about demolition from their years of experience in the field, but please don't assume that kowtowing to authority is somehow inherent with someone noticing the obvious...that demolition experts and structural and civil engineers with experience in the subject at hand know more about the subject than a theologian.


Threadbear has not "insisted that religious experts know something about demolition." But she does insist that one's credentials as a "religious expert" should not preclude another from taking his research, analysis and exposition seriously.

Let's look at the flip side of what you're saying. If you claim that a religious expert, by definition, can not credibly investigate a non-religious issue, does it then follow by your logic that any scientific-expert, by definition, is automatically credible? And, if so, how can you be sure that said expert would be free from coercion either from his employer or from his other professional associates?

How about this as an expert: One who is free from obvious conflicts of interest, who does a credible job in gathering and presenting the facts and contradictions in the evidence, and who has drawn credible conclusions therefrom? If that sounds reasonable to you, then why do you feel that David Ray Griffin does not qualify?

Do you refuse to read his book?

Here. Check out the reviews on Amazon thus far. They're stellar and the author receives nearly consistent praise for his thoroughness and objectivity.

After reading these reviews, don't you think you have perhaps been a little too judgmental of Mr. Griffin?

Only $13.60 from Amazon. Order yours today. :)
User avatar
Zentric
Tar Sands
Tar Sands
 
Posts: 709
Joined: Mon 14 Mar 2005, 04:00:00
Top

Re: "Debunking..."

Unread postby PraiseDoom » Sat 12 May 2007, 22:50:42

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Zentric', '
')
Threadbear has not "insisted that religious experts know something about demolition." But she does insist that one's credentials as a "religious expert" should not preclude another from taking his research, analysis and exposition seriously.



Right. Billg said

"Here is a list of 25 "experts" in the mathematical, science, and engineering fields who question the official account of 911. Scroll down a bit.

http://patriotsquestion911.com/professors.html#Griscom"

I made it through about the first 16 or so, which was perhaps 20% or so down the page and got bored counting professors of religious studies commenting on the book when my original question related to actual experts in the fields in question rather than people with degree's in highly advanced scientific fields like religion.

Threadbare didn't provide the list of experts, BillG did.

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Zentric', '
')
Let's look at the flip side of what you're saying. If you claim that a religious expert, by definition, can not credibly investigate a non-religious issue, does it then follow by your logic that any scientific-expert, by definition, is automatically credible? And, if so, how can you be sure that said expert would be free from coercion either from his employer or from his other professional associates?


I said no such thing. What I said was, in an arguement in a given area, I will defer to various experts in that area prior to their ideas/theories/scientific basis being disproven by someone else. So the basis of my question is more, where are the demolition experts on the opposite side of the equation? Their opinion in a demolition debate, by training and experience, is superior to a professor of religious studies. Does this mean a professor of religious studies is incompetent in basic math and science and therefore has NO opinion of value? Of course not. But what the religious professor needs to do is run down the street to the nearest demolition consultant and find one to write a report on the presence of thermite in the dust in Lower Manhatten from the explosion, write a report on how the steel could only have been cut and not just heated to the point of structural failure, etc etc. Otherwise, its just a professor or religion with an interesting idea. I didn't say he couldn't be correct, but it sure would be nice if he would corral an expert or two to refute what the other side has...which doesn't appear to be professors of religion substituted as experts in demolition.

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Zentric', '
')How about this as an expert: One who is free from obvious conflicts of interest, who does a credible job in gathering and presenting the facts and contradictions in the evidence, and who has drawn credible conclusions therefrom? If that sounds reasonable to you, then why do you feel that David Ray Griffin does not qualify?


Under the rules of "everyone who studies something" as expert, I can't disqualify David Ray. But I can ask why he doesn't round up some professional and highly qualified support in the form of engineers, demolition experts, etc etc, and then use that expertise in concert with his own to dismantle the 9-11 official story? Now THAT is the kind of debate or book or whatever which needs to be written.

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Zentric', '
')

Do you refuse to read his book?

After reading these reviews, don't you think you have perhaps been a little too judgmental of Mr. Griffin?

Only $13.60 from Amazon. Order yours today. :)


I wouldn't REFUSE to read his book, its just not something I would normally seek out. I will accept copies shipped to my door free of charge of course.
User avatar
PraiseDoom
Lignite
Lignite
 
Posts: 289
Joined: Mon 23 Apr 2007, 03:00:00
Top

Re: "Debunking 911 Debunking"

Unread postby billg » Sun 13 May 2007, 00:10:26

Praisedoom,

You didn't scroll down the list of the 130 professors to the mathematics/engineering section. You're entitled to your opinion, just don't misconstrue the material I offered you.

I gave you what you asked for. Check out Stephen Jones.
billg
Tar Sands
Tar Sands
 
Posts: 803
Joined: Sun 17 Sep 2006, 03:00:00
Location: No man's land
Top

Re: "Debunking..."

Unread postby Zentric » Sun 13 May 2007, 00:33:32

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('PraiseDoom', 'R')ight. Billg said

"Here is a list of 25 "experts" in the mathematical, science, and engineering fields who question the official account of 911. Scroll down a bit.

http://patriotsquestion911.com/professors.html#Griscom"

I made it through about the first 16 or so, which was perhaps 20% or so down the page and got bored counting professors of religious studies commenting on the book when my original question related to actual experts in the fields in question rather than people with degree's in highly advanced scientific fields like religion.


Fair enough. But check Billg's more recent replies about this.

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('PraiseDoom', '.').. But what the religious professor needs to do is run down the street to the nearest demolition consultant and find one to write a report on the presence of thermite in the dust in Lower Manhatten from the explosion, write a report on how the steel could only have been cut and not just heated to the point of structural failure, etc etc. Otherwise, its just a professor or religion with an interesting idea. I didn't say he couldn't be correct, but it sure would be nice if he would corral an expert or two to refute what the other side has...

Under the rules of "everyone who studies something" as expert, I can't disqualify David Ray. But I can ask why he doesn't round up some professional and highly qualified support in the form of engineers, demolition experts, etc etc, and then use that expertise in concert with his own to dismantle the 9-11 official story? Now THAT is the kind of debate or book or whatever which needs to be written.


More fair observations. I have yet to read the book myself. Nonetheless, I'm fairly confident that David Ray Griffin has cited the findings of and has given consideration to the appropriate experts from multiple disciplines - physics, structural engineering, demolitions, fire fighting, etc. Perhaps there are people here on this thread who have already read the book that can help settle this?
User avatar
Zentric
Tar Sands
Tar Sands
 
Posts: 709
Joined: Mon 14 Mar 2005, 04:00:00
Top

Re: "Debunking 911 Debunking"

Unread postby Carlhole » Sun 13 May 2007, 07:01:35

[web]http://www.fromthewilderness.com/free/ww3/02_11_02_lucy.html[/web]
Carlhole
 
Top

Re: "Debunking 911 Debunking"

Unread postby NoLogos » Sun 13 May 2007, 07:34:42

I would like to thank Carlhole and others who keep plugging away at the mental blocks put into the minds of Americans by the MSM. It must be a thankless task, as bad as when I try to change the rather closed minds of friends/family.

God only knows what the Nazi press called those who said the Reichstag fire was Nazi arson... :(
User avatar
NoLogos
Peat
Peat
 
Posts: 68
Joined: Mon 13 Nov 2006, 04:00:00
Top

Re: "Debunking..."

Unread postby NWMossBack » Sun 13 May 2007, 13:19:57

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('PraiseDoom', 'S')o the basis of my question is more, where are the demolition experts on the opposite side of the equation? Their opinion in a demolition debate, by training and experience, is superior to a professor of religious studies.

A noble effort PD, but ultimately Quixotic. Much like religious zealots, 9/11 conspiracy theorists have taken a "leap of faith". Perhaps believing satisfies some deep psychological need, or maybe it's just more fun than reality based worldviews. You will never persuade either group to abandon their respective faiths using rational arguments.
User avatar
NWMossBack
Lignite
Lignite
 
Posts: 202
Joined: Wed 24 Jan 2007, 04:00:00
Location: Pacific NW USA
Top

Re: "Debunking..."

Unread postby Zentric » Sun 13 May 2007, 16:00:46

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('NWMossBack', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('PraiseDoom', 'S')o the basis of my question is more, where are the demolition experts on the opposite side of the equation? Their opinion in a demolition debate, by training and experience, is superior to a professor of religious studies.

A noble effort PD, but ultimately Quixotic. Much like religious zealots, 9/11 conspiracy theorists have taken a "leap of faith". Perhaps believing satisfies some deep psychological need, or maybe it's just more fun than reality based worldviews. You will never persuade either group to abandon their respective faiths using rational arguments.


The discussion PraiseDoom is having with others is precisely about the need for everyone to stick with rational arguments, and on this point there appears to be agreement. But maybe you don't see that.

Well, I guess you can't help some people.
User avatar
Zentric
Tar Sands
Tar Sands
 
Posts: 709
Joined: Mon 14 Mar 2005, 04:00:00
Top

Re: "Debunking 911 Debunking"

Unread postby PraiseDoom » Sun 13 May 2007, 17:32:19

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('billg', 'P')raisedoom,

You didn't scroll down the list of the 130 professors to the mathematics/engineering section. You're entitled to your opinion, just don't misconstrue the material I offered you.

I gave you what you asked for.


Got it.
User avatar
PraiseDoom
Lignite
Lignite
 
Posts: 289
Joined: Mon 23 Apr 2007, 03:00:00
Top

Re: "Debunking 911 Debunking"

Unread postby PraiseDoom » Sun 13 May 2007, 17:35:21

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Carlhole', '[')web]http://www.fromthewilderness.com/free/ww3/02_11_02_lucy.html[/web]


Sorry...Ruppert I am familiar with, and he in no way qualifies as an expert on anything, and bringing him into any type of rational arguement basically concedes the point.

The references BillG provided have more credibility in their bowel movements than Ruppert has in his entire lifetime.
User avatar
PraiseDoom
Lignite
Lignite
 
Posts: 289
Joined: Mon 23 Apr 2007, 03:00:00
Top

Re: "Debunking 911 Debunking"

Unread postby Carlhole » Sun 13 May 2007, 20:57:54

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('PraiseDoom', 'S')orry...Ruppert I am familiar with, and he in no way qualifies as an expert on anything


I posted Ruppert's article of Nov '01 out of sentiment, not meaning. It's six years old.

Griffin's new book is such that you have to read it, to argue at all about 911.

I like the last review on this page: "The Real McCoy and The Gold Standard - Not for 'Conspiracy Kooks', April 24, 2007
Reviewer: G. Espada (Somerville, MA USA)"


[web]http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/customer-reviews/156656686X/sr=1-1/qid=1179102306/ref=cm_cr_dp_2_1/002-3094305-7442430?ie=UTF8&customer-reviews.sort%5Fby=-SubmissionDate&n=283155&qid=1179102306&sr=1-1/[/web]
Carlhole
 
Top

Re: "Debunking 911 Debunking"

Unread postby recordbreaker » Fri 18 May 2007, 21:50:02

If we can't face it, God can't fix it.

Denial stops here.

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid ... 3329239954
User avatar
recordbreaker
Wood
Wood
 
Posts: 1
Joined: Fri 18 May 2007, 03:00:00
Top

Re: "Debunking 911 Debunking"

Unread postby PraiseDoom » Fri 18 May 2007, 23:14:59

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('recordbreaker', 'I')f we can't face it, God can't fix it.

Denial stops here.



PRAISE THE LORD AND PASS THE DOOM!!!! :mrgreen:
User avatar
PraiseDoom
Lignite
Lignite
 
Posts: 289
Joined: Mon 23 Apr 2007, 03:00:00
Top

Re: "Debunking 911 Debunking"

Unread postby NEOPO » Fri 18 May 2007, 23:27:04

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('PraiseDoom', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('recordbreaker', 'I')f we can't face it, God can't fix it.

Denial stops here.



PRAISE THE LORD AND PASS THE DOOM!!!! :mrgreen:


Who let this guy in? 8)
It is easier to enslave a people that wish to remain free then it is to free a people who wish to remain enslaved.
User avatar
NEOPO
Permanently Banned
 
Posts: 3588
Joined: Sun 15 May 2005, 03:00:00
Location: THE MATRIX
Top
PreviousNext
Post a reply

Return to Book/Media Reviews

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest



cron