Momopi, it looks like you may be wrong in your claim...

[Winston]

Momopi,
Remember when you said that the whole 9/11 debate was fruitless and pointless and idle speculation that would lead nowhere?

Well in light of recent events, you may be wrong. But will you admit it?

First, the 9/11 Truth movement is totally evidence and fact based, not speculative (which was the narrow minded box that you put it into).

Recently it has been reaching critical mass, to the point that the US government has declared it a threat and even asked Harvard Law School for recommendations. In response, Cass Sunstein wrote a paper suggesting that the US government infiltrate the 9/11 Truth Movement and destroy it from within. Do you think they would do that if it was nothing but idle speculation? Here is a copy of the Sunstein paper, which was taken down after public attention was brought to it:

http://www.ae911truth.org/newsletter/20 ... p#Sunstein

On Feb 19, AE911Truth.org held its first Press Conference in San Francisco, which is a milestone. They also got on PBS in Denver, CO too. So they have been having successes and reaching milestones in the media.

So then how can you say it is all idle and useless?

Also, recently a major Japanese newspaper that reaches 8 million Japanese readers published an article supporting AE911Truth and claiming that "the official 9/11 story is unconvincing" (which you hold to be Gospel Truth).

Now, I know you have a lot of respect for Japanese things. So if their major newspaper agrees that the official story of 9/11 makes no sense and doesn't account for all the data, doesn't that opinion hold more weight in your eyes?

See a translated version of the Japanese article here:

http://www.ae911truth.org/newsletter/20 ... php#Weekly

60 Aerospace engineers from NASA also support 9/11 Truth and are calling for a new investigation too. Would they do that if it was nothing but pointless idle speculation as you call it?

http://www.ae911truth.org/newsletter/20 ... #Aerospace

Richard Gage of AE911Truth recently won a public debate with explosives expert Ron Craig, in which Craig was unscientific in denying evidence that doesn't fit his hypothesis:

http://www.ae911truth.org/newsletter/20 ... php#Debate

Town meetings on the East Coast are also calling for a ballot to vote on a new and real 9/11 investigation.

http://keenesentinel.com/articles/2010/ ... 388463.txt

In light of all this and more, do you admit that MAYBE you were wrong in saying that this whole movement is pointless and idle?

YES?

Personal question to you:

Suppose 9/11 Truth is right and that 9/11 was an inside job. Do YOU personally feel that the perpetrators should be punished and brought to justice? Or do you hold them blameless since you said before that governments have the right to commit any crimes or murders that it feels it needs to?

What is your view?

Don't you believe in justice? Shouldn't a crime be exposed? Don't people have a right to know the truth?

What is your answer?

Final question:

Can you provide a VALID HYPOTHESIS for the WTC collapse that accounts for ALL TEN FEATURES, supported by hard evidence and testimonials, besides controlled demolition? For example: molten steel, thermite, squibs, explosions, free fall in the path of greatest resistance, pulverization of dust, etc.

The government, FEMA, NIST, Popular Mechanics, the 9/11 Commission, the JREF debunkers and all other defenders of the official story have all FAILED to do so. Instead, they spout the official fire explanation and nitpick the conspiracy claims, offering NOTHING to support all the data, and ignoring all the hard evidence and facts.

Can YOU do what they've failed to do?

IF YOU CAN, then I will shut up and never say another word about this.

IF YOU CAN'T, then you should ADMIT your ignorance on this matter and that the truth isn't known and that there is a valid case for 9/11 Truth and a new investigation.

There is NO ESCAPE from this.

Your subjective dismissals and psychological fear of the truth does NOT erase the reality, facts, evidence and data.

I await your hypothesis or admittance.

[momopi]

The 9/11 truth movement:

60 Aerospace engineers from NASA also support 9/11 Truth and are calling for a new investigation too. Would they do that if it was nothing but pointless idle speculation as you call it?

Hint: the above statement sound stupid, it's like saying "less than 1% of the people in the room agrees".

If you actually want me to waste time on something this stupid, I need to be compensated financially for it.


If you happen to see Mr. Richard Gage, please tell him that what if he wants attention, what he needs is a good publicist ($2000-$3000/month).

What Richard Gage thinks of himself:



What he actually looks like:



Or, he can hire this guy, who can probably generate more publicity in 1 week than all of "9/11 truth movement" in 10 years:

[Winston]

No need to waste your time. But can you take 10 seconds to answer this question?

Would the global media give something positive coverage if it was BS and not backed by credible valid evidence? I don't think so. And would 1000+ architects and engineers with a combined professional experience of 25,000 years sign their name to something that was BS?

I don't think so...

Also, if I'm right and it turns out that the 9/11 thing blows wide open and the criminals get arrested and prosecuted for it, will you apologize and admit that you were wrong?

40+ cities in the US on Februrary 19 just held a press conference on 9/11 Truth. The movement is taking off. Something very real is happening that's not BS. Surely you see that right?

Why do you have a psychological block on this issue? Why do you want to protect the criminals who did this?

Momopi, if you have a few minutes, look at the serious objective coverage of the mainstream Canadian media on 9/11 Truth taking off! Obviously, they are not ridiculing it like you are. Why is that? Everyone knows that 9/11 Truth is BS right? So when is it taking off now and why is the media in Canada covering it seriously now?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2G1ub2caUNU
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=agqfH8p0Yho

[Winston]

The 9/11 truth movement:

60 Aerospace engineers from NASA also support 9/11 Truth and are calling for a new investigation too. Would they do that if it was nothing but pointless idle speculation as you call it?

Hint: the above statement sound stupid, it's like saying "less than 1% of the people in the room agrees".

I don't understand what you mean. 1 percent? A lot more than 1 percent disbelieve the 9/11 official story. And recently that number has MULTIPLIED after the press conference and global media giving it serious coverage now. It's really REALLY taking off! Don't you see the significance of all this?! How can you not?!

Why do you hate the truth so much, even though it points in the conspiracy direction in this case, with scientific forensic evidence?

Why do you cling to the official story which has been proven to have a ZERO percent probability? That is 100 percent illogical.

You know that I'm smart right? I would not be supporting this if there was not something to it. I am very unlikely to support BS. You know that!

[momopi]

I don't understand what you mean. 1 percent? A lot more than 1 percent disbelieve the 9/11 official story. And recently that number has MULTIPLIED after the press conference and global media giving it serious coverage now. It's really REALLY taking off! Don't you see the significance of all this?! How can you not?!

OK, I will explain for free, just this once.

When you cite a number, it's only significant if the number is large enough in proportion to the sum. So if you say "60 aerospace engineers...", you have to consider how many aerospace engineers there are in the US and how many NASA employs. You can't throw a rock in NASA without hitting a dozen.

If I said "10 dentists recommends brand X tooth paste" when there are 10,000 dentists in my area, that sounds really stupid.

People cite numbers when there are no particular individual of authority. If I said "100 scientists can't be wrong", what about the other 250,000? If I ran a survey with 10,000 scientists and only 100 agrees with my opinion, it's not worth much.

You know that I'm smart right? I would not be supporting this if there was not something to it. I am very unlikely to support BS. You know that!

uh, yeah... this coming from someone who believes in mediumship? Have fun with your foggy crystal ball by yourself. I'm out of the conversation.

[Winston]

Another point momopi.

If the whole 9/11 thing was BS, then the number of supporters would be shrinking, not growing. Yet the supporters are growing and MULTIPLYING.

Doesn't that tell you something?

Why are you getting sidetracked with irrelevant points? The point is that the facts and evidence now point toward controlled demolition, not the goverment's story. Any rational person can see that. You are NOT addressing this important issue. Lemmings has nothing to do with it.

One last question: Since all the evidence points to the official story being a lie now, why do you support it religiously? Why? On what basis?

PS - Your shot about mediumships was cheap. I didn't say I believed in mediumship. I merely said that there are MANY cases that you can't explain that do not fit the fraud hypothesis. For example, George Anderson gets details right that he couldn't have known, which are highly specific. You did NOT address that. I'm merely saying there are things you can't explain. Agreed?

Why are you sooooooooooooooooo DAMN closed minded and why do you AVOID the serious questions? I thought you were wise and practical?!

[Winston]

Momopi,
Btw, your number crunching logic is very misleading. Just because 100 dentists out of a million endorse a product, does not mean the rest of the million are against it. That is a huge fallacy and false. It is not realistic to expect one to interview a million dentists. That is raising the bar to an impossible standard. Now if you interviewed 100 dentists and 10 of them endorsed it, while 90 of them said the product was bad, then you would have a case.

Understand?

In this case, Richard Gage has said that MOST of the engineers he's talked to AGREED with him. So that's what counts.

You can't expect him to personally speak with every engineer in the country. That's not realistic or fair. You know that.

BUT, when he has shown the evidence to engineers, MOST of them agree with him.

So that's a good sign and that's what counts.

Agreed?

[momopi]

Momopi,
Btw, your number crunching logic is very misleading. Just because 100 dentists out of a million endorse a product, does not mean the rest of the million are against it. That is a huge fallacy and false. It is not realistic to expect one to interview a million dentists. That is raising the bar to an impossible standard. Now if you interviewed 100 dentists and 10 of them endorsed it, while 90 of them said the product was bad, then you would have a case.

OK, first, a fallacy is a misconception from incorrect reasoning or logic. To say "XXX architects agree..." is actually not a logical reasoning, it falls under argumentum ad numerum. This is a marketing technique and has nothing to do with logic. You use this marketing technique to sell your products or ideas when:

* You don't have a high-value authority, celebrity, or public speaker. One Britney Spears is worth more than 1,000 scientists with truckloads of data.
* The number cited is large enough to the sum or the control group. i.e. "8 out of 10 dentists recommends..."
* There's sufficient popularity for herd behavior (bandwagon) to work. i.e. when people see a long line at a restaurant, they assume the food is good.


Before we continue, let me state that I don't respond to negative reinforcement, and I write posts ad libitum (to my pleasure, without advanced preparation, spontaneously whenever I feel like it). I like latin, those Roman guys used short words because it's expensive to carve them into stone, hahaha. Anyways, I make a distinction between a hobby and not a hobby. A hobby is done to my pleasure and I do it for free, versus "not a hobby" is work and I must be compensated for my time. The simple rule is that if you cannot make this distinction, you'd fall into negative cash-flow and have to borrow $ to pay for your living expenses.

When you write a lengthy post with XX questions in your attempt to "win" via proof by assertion or argumentum ad nauseam, on topics that I don't care about, I have no incentive to write a detailed reply. Thus, if I choose to write something, it's whatever I feel like, a shameless straw-man reply. If you want me to spend time on dumb topics, I'd charge you $60 per hour for my time. Telling people that they're wrong and throwing impassioned rhetoric in their face works with people who have low self-esteem. It doesn't work with people with a healthy dose of apathy.

For practical purpose, time moves in one direction for us. It doesn't matter what you believe in general theory of relativity, if you screwed something up yesterday, you cannot go back and fix it. Events also become less relevant with the passage of time. Suppose if the Apollo Moon Lands were proven to be faked today, it'd just be chalked up as another Cold War play. For those born after the event, it's another textbook entry. 9/11 occurred 9 years ago and whatever consequence is already fait accompli. Peter Joseph (Zeitgeist) probably understands this and simply stated his position and moved on. He didn't stick around to resuscitate a dead cat.

The last steps in scientific method is test of reproductivity and peer-review. This means that your claim must be verified with testing, and the test can be reproduced by you and others for verification. Obviously, we can't build another set of WTC towers and fly 2 airplanes into it, then rebuild it over and over again until we collect sufficient test data. The best that we could do from scientific stand point is to build detailed computer simulations and try to reproduce all environmental factors in the simulation (with peer review), which is quite difficult and costly. I mean the kind of quality used for military nuclear warhead detonation simulation, not the amateur Google Earth stuff you see on youtube from some college kids. Therefore, the practical goal of the 9/11 truth movement is to utilize marketing techniques and mobilize as many people as possible to pressure the government to re-open the inquiry and allocate sufficient funds and resources for such a project. Ironically the people with $$ who'd benefit the most are Saudi Arabs, but asking them for funding would look quite bad.

Whatever evidence that the 9/11 truth movement churns out at this point is not quality data -- a valid hypothesis based upon hard scientific data must be subject to testing and peer-verification. What they have is "investigative journalism", which is not the scientific method or even basic exploratory data analysis. For example, a basic data analysis model:

1. Suggest hypothesis (the chicken crossed the road because...)
2. Make assumptions (the chicken is hungry)
3. Select statistical tool or methods (10 hungry chickens on this side of the road)
4. Provide data for further analysis and verification (8 out of 10 chickens crossed the road)

There was a famous statistical study called Lady tasting tea. A women at a party with many scientists said that tea tasted better if you poured milk into the tea and not tea into the milk. The scientists did not believe that there would be a "taste difference" between pouring milk into the tea vs. pouring tea into milk. So they conducted a blind-tasting test and she was able to correctly identify which cup was tea infused with milk vs. milk infused with tea. In other words, the "scientific opinions" were all proven wrong by the actual test and verified with reproductivity. That, is hard science.


Now let's look at Mr. Richard Gage. In the 4-5 years that he has lead the AE911truth.org project, how much useful publicity has he really generated, compared to the time spent? You think getting some press cover is "critical mass" ? Britney Spears flashing her boobies would generate more press in 30 seconds. If Mr. Gage is serious about his efforts, he should convince people to send him funds (or pay himself) and hire a publicist. Or, if he wants to do a grass-roots movement, he should hire Louis Farrakhan to teach him how to do a "million man march" to Washington. If Mr. Gage was running a restaurant the same way, I think it'd be out of business by now. Mr. Gage is not very good looking, and his public speaking skills is mediocre at best. He needs to take some public speech classes and join Toastmasters International.

If you want someone to join you on a bandwagon, you need to attract them into joining you. i.e. if you came up to me and said "let's all be connected and united in oneness", the first thought to mind is "eewwewewewe", "heart attack" and "D4 P41|\| !!! h3[p ! 3Y3 |\|33d d4 d0c70r !"

But if it was a hot girl, I'd say "Yeah baby, let's join at the hips!" But you're not a hot chic, so you need to either do better marketing, or pay incentives. When Carter and Regan debated, Jimmy Carter actually won the debate but lost the election, because Regan was a professional actor and looked better (more appealing) on TV.


Off to Atlanta, adéu~

[Winston]

Momopi,
How do you know anything about Peter Joseph or Richard Gage when you've never listened to them or watched their videos?

Perhaps you are a NWO agent and know a lot more than you're letting on? lol

I don't agree that Gage is not a good public speaker. He's not charismatic yeah, but he looks credible and likable. Professionals trust him more than Alex Jones for instance, cause Gage LOOKS credible and mellow and easy going, and his presentations are professional. I found him to be a great speaker, but that's my opinion. Many engineers agree.

You didn't even watch his 2 hour presentation "9/11 Blueprint for Truth" so how can you comment on Gage's speaking skills?

He has done the best he can. He got on the media a few times, mostly in other countries, and his group is the most credible 911 Truth group. They are doing this for truth and not for profit and you should respect that.

It's not Gage's fault if the mainstream media in the US doesn't give him more coverage. They are afraid at the chaos and anarchy that would erupt if the truth came out, obviously. All hell would break loose, and millions would march on the White House demanding the conspirators turn themselves in. The US military may even be in their side.

But regardless of Gage's marketing techniques, the bottom line is that ALL THE EVIDENCE does not support the official 9/11 story.

Most objective people who look at the evidence agree. That's the bottom line.

Even the Japanese media is starting to believe that Gage is on to something. You respect the Japanese media right?

The people who don't buy the official theory is INCREASING, not decreasing.

Of course, like my friend said, the people who did 9/11 to start a war, OWN THE SYSTEM, so you can't technically use the system to convict them, since they own it.

What do you suggest then? Doesn't truth matter?

[momopi]

You didn't even watch his 2 hour presentation "9/11 Blueprint for Truth" so how can you comment on Gage's speaking skills?

That will be $120 dollars for 120 minuets (2 hours).