What Would Go Through My Mind If I Were an Academic Engineer Thinking About Writing a Paper Espousing Demolition of the WTC
Considering it is a politically sensitive topic--
1) what will my peers think of me?
2) will this affect my job/my career (my family)?
3) will this help my career, help me get promoted, help me get grants?
4) will this affect my future ability to get federal research money?
5) is this worth the potential negative consequences for me and my family?
6) is this worth my time and effort?
Considering how much time and training it takes to get into an academic position, who is really going to risk their career on something like this?
Related post-- "Why Haven't More Scientists and Engineers Spoken Out About the Controlled Demolition of the World Trade Center?"
Update: all these reasons listed above would keep someone from even probing very far into the issue. If the scientist did enough research (got past the disinfo) to be convinced of demolition, then they also have to worry about being harmed themselves by a murderous regime-- or their family being harmed, or their career being intentionally destroyed.
1) what will my peers think of me?
2) will this affect my job/my career (my family)?
3) will this help my career, help me get promoted, help me get grants?
4) will this affect my future ability to get federal research money?
5) is this worth the potential negative consequences for me and my family?
6) is this worth my time and effort?
Considering how much time and training it takes to get into an academic position, who is really going to risk their career on something like this?
Related post-- "Why Haven't More Scientists and Engineers Spoken Out About the Controlled Demolition of the World Trade Center?"
Update: all these reasons listed above would keep someone from even probing very far into the issue. If the scientist did enough research (got past the disinfo) to be convinced of demolition, then they also have to worry about being harmed themselves by a murderous regime-- or their family being harmed, or their career being intentionally destroyed.
posted by spooked at 8:16 AM
43 Comments:
You say "something like this" as though it's a trivial thing. The government murdered 3000 of it's own citizens.
Risking your career to expose that kind of thing is your duty. Especially since the cover up is so obvious that thousands of other scientists will also be backing you up.
...
I love this mentality though. You can't say that the reason more of the scientific community isn't on your side is because they're paid off. That's just irrational. So you suggest that only some are paid off.
... The rest are just cowards.
In the process, you not only "sympathize" with their situation, but build yourself up because you DO have the guts to talk about it.
Quite manipulative. Bravo.
Chad:
Wouldn't it be better for Shilldom if you at least attempted to respond to the actual substance of Spooked's points and argument?
By merely posting amateurish BS, it makes you seem at best like a intellectually-challenged rightwinger, and at best, like a paid
SHILL.
The government murdered 3000 of it's own citizens. Risking your career to expose that kind of thing is your duty.
It is Chad's job to point this out every few days - don't fail in your new duty Chad!
"who is really going to risk their career on something like this?"
Easy. Someone who has the facts and evidence on their side and who seriously, honestly believe in the power of their convictions. To do anything less is the heart and soul of a coward.
Gee....like you!
But then again you 1) don't have facts and 2) don't have evidence and 3) don't obviously believe in this crap or have ANY power of your conviction.
So I suppose in the bottom line, I wouldn't look at writing or publishing a paper, either.
Besides, what sort of "career" are you "risking"? You are an insignificant dust mote as far as these things go.
All that, plus add in the fact that you aren't an "academic engineer" and that apparently your claim that "...9/11 was a massive and cruel hoax foisted upon the world, done in order to spark the obscene "war on terror"..." is nothing but jaw jacking and this whole thing isn't that big a deal, anyways.
You people have no clue about academics and you apparently don't have families to worry about either.
In the movies, someone might risk everything for justice. In the real world, there are real considerations.
If there was substance in the post that I could respond to, that would be great.
Unfortunately, all Spooked is doing is speculating on why more of the academic community has not come out in defense of conspiracy theories. He has no evidence for any of his six points. Just mere conjecture that fits in with his paranoid world view.
In all honesty, I'm not even sure why he does this since, just a few posts earlier, he informs us that we should "not automatically trust" the experts anyway.
The bottom line is that a government that has killed its citizens in the past will most assuredly do so again in the future.
Let's put this on a smaller scale.
You have proof that would convict a suspected child rapist and murderer. For whatever reason, coming forward with this evidence could easily get you fired or worse. Maybe this person is even in your circle of friends.
What do you do?
The ChadShill knows you're right, Spooked. And anyone who knows how politics works in academia, knows how right you are, too. I lived with the
head of a department at a University (13,000 students) for three years. The stories she told me about the infighting, backstabbing, and "go along to get along" mentality that prevailed at all levels of the faculty and Administration would make your hair curl even more than it already is.
Maybe the ChadShill is trying to be funny, or maybe ironic. He certainly doesn't know what he's talking about.
The bottom line is that a government that has killed its citizens in the past will most assuredly do so again in the future.
...Chad
oh absolutely chad, i could not agree more!
and since it is patently obvious to anyone who really looks at the events of 9/11 even slightly that the powers that be utilizing the american govt/media are the ones who indeed killed it's citizens, the question does remain:
what should we do about it?
"The bottom line is that a government that has killed its citizens in the past will most assuredly do so again in the future.
...Chad"
What would CHAD do about it?
One year after JFK was assassinated, there was a SURGE in Vietnam. Shortly after the events of 9/11, there was a SURGE in Afghanistan.
Question: can anyone here provide a link to information regarding whether or not a Presidential Executive Order was issued by Johnson and Bush with regard to Vietnam (in the case of LBJ) and Afghanistan (Bush)?
"what should we do about it?"
Nothing apparently and obviously, other than talk about various and sundry conspiracy theories on an obscure web page and whine about how my family or my dog or my job or my 401K might be at risk if I publish a peer-reviewed, high technical engineering study.
""and whine about how my family or my dog or my job or my 401K might be at risk if I publish a peer-reviewed, high technical engineering study""
really - is that what is happening here?
odd.
that aspect hasn't once surfaced until now that you, chad, have brought it up.
hey chad, where is Bazant's "sledgehammer"?
and why exactly was Bazant's latest WTC demolition *analyses* REJECTED by the Journal Of Engineering Mechanics...?
Hey Chad do you have any suggestions as to how one should go about spreading one's supposed truth?
Or are you simply full of hot air?
Me, I would truly love to spread the truth as I see it, but after reading your several comments I am unsure as to what exactly needs to be done.
Do you have any advice for me Chad?
oh absolutely chad, i could not agree more!
and since it is patently obvious to anyone who really looks at the events of 9/11 even slightly that the powers that be utilizing the american govt/media are the ones who indeed killed it's citizens, the question does remain:
what should we do about it?
Well obviously, were that truly the case... SOMETHING should be done. I think we're all in agreement that a government willing to murder thousands of its own citizens is a government worth getting rid of.
Spooked, however, is of the mind that people are just too scared.
To answer your question though.... I'd be all but begging those cowards to come forward with their proof to present to the world at large. Obviously, a certain amount of expertise will be required to be taken seriously, so those who actually HAVE that expertise need to step up to the plate.
Otherwise, we are all... every last one of us... doomed.
And just in case this question was missed by anyone:
You have proof that would convict a suspected child rapist and murderer. For whatever reason, coming forward with this evidence could easily get you fired or worse. Maybe this person is even in your circle of friends.
What do you do?
"""just in case this question was missed by anyone:
You have proof that would convict a suspected child rapist and murderer. For whatever reason, coming forward with this evidence could easily get you fired or worse. Maybe this person is even in your circle of friends"""
wow i must have missed that one! maybe i was worrying too much about 9/11 to wonder about anyone in your family tree.
hey chad, where is Bazant's alleged "sledgehammer" that totally removed a WTC in only 10 seconds?
I think we're all in agreement that a government willing to murder thousands of its own citizens is a government worth getting rid of.
Spooked, however, is of the mind that people are just too scared.
I have to sgree with you about a govt worth getting rid of, but I don't understand why you keep putting it on Spooked when you are the one who keeps suggesting that a certain govt is in need of being gotten rid of.
Do you have any real advice for us, Chad?
"You have proof that would convict a suspected child rapist and murderer. For whatever reason, coming forward with this evidence could easily get you fired or worse. Maybe this person is even in your circle of friends.
What do you do?"
Forget it Chad. They'll never, ever, ever answer this question. Ever. They can't handled complex thought like that, turning it into a moral mental dilemma - as if putting a child rapist and murderer away versus keeping a job is any sort of moral dilemma.
Intellectual and moral cowards, of the finest kind. Spooky is their lead and as such he deserves the lion's share of absolute disdain - claiming that this is the worst thing that has ever happened in the history of the world and yet prefers to do *nothing* about it, with his minions hanging on his every word and doing nothing but coming up with a "What would you do Chad!" response.
Brilliant.
Forget everyone. Obviously, the paid shill aka "Chad" isn't going to answer your questions.
The fact that "ChadShill" keeps referring to this as "an obscure" web page might be evidence that s/he really IS a paid Disinfo/PR/Shillery person. Someone MUST have done a very careful search to find this page and must have REALLY wanted to be here. If the ChadShills were simply rightwingnuts, why in the world would they want to be here in the first place?
"You have proof that would convict a suspected child rapist and murderer. For whatever reason, coming forward with this evidence could easily get you fired or worse. Maybe this person is even in your circle of friends.
What do you do?"
I would submit the proof. That's an easy question, and far far different from going public with implicating a whole regime in murder.
Now, where'd the sledgehammer go, genius shills?
What don't you understand about Bazant's "perfect inelastic collision" not being a good model for floor collapses don't you understand, genius shills?
What don't you understand about Bazant's "crush down then crush up" not representing reality don't you understand, genius shills?
Thanks for actually answering the question, Spooked. I'd like to know just how different the two scenarios are, morally speaking.
And why this obsession with a sledgehammer? It's interesting that it's brought up in just about every thread, regardless of what the topic is about. You guys are A.) really on to something with it and should therefore share this smoking gun with the rest of the world, or B.) really have no clue how to answer a question and opt to fall back on the sledge.
But to answer your question, I haven't the first fucking clue. As I have stated before on here, I do not pretend to know and understand the physics of the collapses. Unlike this blog's author and his followers.
Do not trust the experts, but trust a blogger.
Brilliant logic.
nice job with changing the subject chad!
so where is any evidence of bazant's "sledgehammer"?
I haven't the first fucking clue. As I have stated before on here, I do not pretend to know and understand the physics of the collapses. Unlike this blog's author and his followers.
...Chad
That's too bad Chad. Maybe you should go find something that you do know something about.
Bazant claimed that the top of the WTC acted as like a sledgehammer and crushed the lower part.
Unfortunately for Bazant's claim, every video of the WTC destruction shows this alleged sledgehammer top being destroyed simultaneous with the lower part that it is supposedly destroying.
But as you say, you don't have the first fucking clue.
"...and far far different from going public with implicating a whole regime in murder."
Far different? Bullshit. You just don't have the balls to do anything about what you *think* happened.
nice job with changing the subject chad!
so where is any evidence of bazant's "sledgehammer"?
I love how the topic of the thread is why people won't come forward and yet I'M the one changing the subject when every other word typed by you people is either "Bazant" or "sledgehammer".
Spooked had three posts about that topic earlier. If they didn't leave you satisfied, I suggest you go back and re-read them until you're content.
If that evidence truly is that earth-shattering, stop jacking off over it on a blog and use it to hold the perps accountable.
You guys are no match for Chad!
Moral differences?
1) not speaking out about a murderous regime when it could get you killed if you did-- or cause you to lose your livelihood-- and you don't even know if your speaking out will have any effect and on top of that you don't know who precisely did the crime
2) not turning in a person who you personally know to be a criminal and might commit another crime
Obviously there are huge differences in the scenarios, and the personal moral "culpability" is a bit different.
Further, I'm not really defending an engineer who doesn't speak out professionally against 9/11-- I'm just saying I can understand why they wouldn't do it. Which either you are too clueless to understand or you are truly a shill.
And further in terms of moral culpability, I have presented quite straight-forward evidence/proof of demolition yet you won't even take the trouble to figure this out?
I think it is clear who is the one who is jacking off here.
You have presented it on a blog and done nothing with it. You are, for all intents and purposes, anonymous. You are unwilling to disclose your credentials.
Why should I believe you?
chad and sword of "truth" are the only ones who care about credentials, maybe because they, as chad said, haven't the first fucking clue when it comes to 9/11 and so they have to rely on others to do their thinking for them.
either that or they are shills.
oh well, the NIST report was all very official-like wasn't it? might as well take their word for it, right?
so. do you got any ideas there chad or are you content to just pretend as if you putting us in our place.
Why should I believe you?
You don't have to believe me, you just have to THINK in a critical manner.
Perhaps that is beyond you.
My credentials DON'T MATTER!
Think for yourself!
E.g. what is so hard to understand about Bazant's "crush down then crush up" not representing what reality (because the top clearly gets crushed as it goes down)?
Again. We are back to the "credentials don't matter" argument.
Experts in their respective fields are no better than your average joe blogger. Doctors, scientists, engineers... people who have spent years learning their craft are no smarter than Spooked.
Need a tumor removed? Hop on down to your local 7-11. Need to tune up your car's allignment? I'll have my sister do it for you. She hasn't graduated high school yet, but she's pretty good at thinking critically for herself. I'm sure it'll drive just like new.
Score another point for Chad!
CHAD '08!
Chad-- there is something called a brain by which you can think and also learn new things.
Try it sometime.
You're just being lazy here by saying this stuff is above you.
CHADSHILL can't be taken seriously, but he IS funny sometimes. In a juvenile sort of way.
Despite what the primary wipe @ 10:21 says, the fact remains that the NIST report was compiled by many *credentialed experts*, and the NIST report got it wrong.
Bazant is another so-called *credentialed expert* and he got it wrong as well, as did Greg Jenkins, re: aluminum 767 vs. steel WTC.
So if these so-called *experts* are supposed to be the last word in credibility then it doesn't say nuch for the concept of "credentials", does it.
On the other hand if one simply has to base their opinions of knowledge on credentials alone, there are many credentialed experts who disagree with the NIST report, Bazant and Greg Jenkins.
Just to name a few:
Engineer Professor Judy Wood
Engineer Jeff King
a Finnish Military Expert
So how does one decide the matter of credential vs. credential?
One must analyze the actual information presented by all of the various credentialed experts and decide for oneself.
Unfortunately for the primary wipe @ 10:21 who styles himself as chad, he has already admitted that he doesn't have a fucking clue.
So where does this leave the casual visitor to this blog - because despite what the primary wipe formerly known as chad says, if one views this blog's site meter then one realizes that this blog is one of the most frequented of all 9/11 sites, despite the paucity of comments.
So, casual visitor to this blog, think and educate yourself, for yourself!
beat it chadwipe!
^ha.
Yes, please. I highly encourage ANYONE to go visit Judy "The Towers Were Like Trees" Wood's site.
Personally, you folks need to get Ms. Wood, Mr. King, and Mr. Finnish Military Expert to get off their butts and do something.
Hurry up though. They are the brave few who risked life and career to speak out about 9/11. I'm sure the NWO will be paying them a visit shortly.
Tick Tock.
I agree with chad!
They should all 3 be out on the street & waving a sign!
good old chad trooper that he is zeroes right in on prof. wood's obscure comparison of the WTC to a tree as if that in any way detracts from her analyses of "collapse" time.
sorry chad but not only have you failed to discredit the credentialed prof. wood's input as pertaining to 9/11 but you have forgotten about this blog's site meter as well.
just because i am the only one who bothers to argue with your admitted haven't got a fucking clue ass doesn't mean that i am the only one who reads this blog.
whatever the truth is, you are not assisting in the cover-up quite as much as you might believe.
maybe chad's services would be better employed waving a "9/11 was not an inside job" sign.
Stating 3,000 people were murdered illustrates the poster is either duped like everyone else or is a shill.
9/11 was just another in a never ending stream of media hoaxes. Think of the 1930s War of the Worlds hoax radio broadcast on steroids.
The function of 9/11-related bloggers, websites, videos, etc., is to reinforce in the public's mind the notion that the imagery presented as "9/11" depicts an actual event in the real world, to keep people locked into an artificial reality--namely, that imagery equates to reality (television by definition, is a simulation of reality). 9/11 consists of Photoshop created images, composite video, CGI and disposable 3rd-rate actors posing as "victims' families".
These people's job is to protect the media.
Someone mentioned Judy Wood. She knows what the truth is but like the rest of the jews she peddles "research" meant to keep people locked into the artificial reality presented by the media.
There are no insights to be gleaned from fabricated imagery.
Post a Comment
<< Home