Prof Steve Jones Resigns from ST911

[Andrew Johnson]

From: www.st911.org

ANNOUNCEMENT: The Good News and the Bad
The bad news is that, as a consequence of an increasing disparity in our approach and attitude toward the science and the politics of 9/11 research, Steve Jones has resigned as a member of Scholars. He intends to continue his research on these events, however, and it is in all of our interests that his contributions to the community should continue. The good news is, because of the contentious nature of issues that have arisen, Scholars is organizing a conference to be devoted to

The Science of 9/11: Controversial Aspects

which will be held in mid- to late-July in Madison, WI. There will be a key-note speaker and five major sessions devoted to the issues that have tended to divide us. As the program chair, I am inviting Steve Jones to organize a panel discussion of the use of conventional means for destroying the Twin Towers. I am inviting Judy Wood to organize a panel discussion on non-conventional means, including high-tech directed energy weaponry, that might have been used to destroy the World Trade Center. I am inviting Morgan Reynolds to organize a panel on planes/no planes at the WTC and George Nelson on the Pentagon and Shanksville.

Another important dimension of our efforts, of course, is explaining why the "official account" that the government has advanced cannot be sustained. Since there can be disagreements even here about what we should or should not emphasize and what has or has not been proven to an extent sufficient to emphasize as a "refutation" of what we have been told, I am also inviting Barrie Zwicker to organize one further panel discussion on "disproofs" of the government's account, which, although mentioned last, will be scheduled for the opening session. I am planning on having five sessions of 2 1/2 to 3 hours duration.

While the program is at its tentative and preliminary stage, I am open to suggestions for possible participants and additional topics. There may be changes in the individuals responsible for some of these panels, but my expectation would be that their focus will remain the same. I anticipate imposing a registration fee of $100 for the week-end long conference, which will include a keynote address on Saturday evening. Anyone who has ideas they would like to share with me is welcome to forward them to me at jfetzer@d.umn.edu at their earliest convenience. This conference should provide an opportunity for experts on complex and technical scientific questions to share their research with us all.

James H. Fetzer
Founder
Scholars for 9/11 Truth

[Fallious]

So they finally get rid of Jones, and the first thing they do is "The Science of 9/11: Controversial Aspects". No plane theory is not a science, and seeing how the beam weapon theory is un-testable, neither can that be.

ST911 is now completely compromised, no one will continue Jones' work and CD theory will be obscured by mounds of controversial research. ST911 will undoubtedly now enjoy the most publicity since it's inception.

Nothings lasts.

[Andrew Johnson]

Fairly quick off the draw aren't we?

Perhaps Fetzer likes to discuss evidence - whatever the conclusions suggest.

He got a lot of hate mail in the last few weeks apparently. This also, apparently, lead him to have reservations about what he was trying to do. Perhaps he has realised that sticking to evidence and science means a better chance of getting to a core of truth.

I support him in that, and I think Morgan Reynolds and Judy Wood do too.

Now then. Umm. "Fallious" what does that handle sound like? Hmmm. Probably nothing.

Have fun.

[THETRUTHWILLSETU3]

[andyb]

I think they should rename it Speculation for Truth and publish a journal on how to lose credibility. I'm not surprised Fetzer has received hate mail. I'll certainly not be directing people to their site now. I'll happily change my mind if any actual evidence of no planes or beams appears but I won't be holding my breath.

[andyb]

[Andrew Johnson]

[THETRUTHWILLSETU3]

[flamesong]

I don't think any nice people condone hate mail but from your earlier post, Andrew, it seems to have paid dividends.

And as for THETRUTHWILLSETU3's assertion that there are lots of people who disagree with Fallious, I count about three or four on this forum and two or three who don't seem to have committed themselves. That's not lots - and I'd guess that the rest of us who have engaged in this debate do not tend to disagree with Falllious.

[edit]: removed misleading comma!

[andyb]

[John White]

RIP ST 9-11

(as a useful part of 9/11 Truthseeking)

boy, did we get played: Ouch!

[THETRUTHWILLSETU3]

[Annie]

Rather than getting bogged down in arguments and vituperation, we should feel sad that this has happened to the Scholars group, and also learn from it.

Whatever the rights and wrongs of the science, certain members of the group appear to have spent most of their time trading bile and insults, and there was a lot ego involved in the process too. Plus, you can't rule out the possibility that certain people may have had a darker, destructive agenda.

Let's hope rigorous academic research goes on into all the possibilities, and that we in the UK can all continue to avoid such schisms.

[Patrick Brown]

I think this really makes Jones the main man now and I hope he finds a new home on the web soon. The very fact that such an effort has been put into disrupting st911.org just adds to the body of evidence for CD.

I really doubt that many people will touch st911.org after all the recent chaos. I wouldn't be surprised if they beg Jones to come back but I don't think he will. The shills plan has backfired I reckon Fetzer, Woods and Morgan have all shown their true colours and Jones has become more credible by disassociating himself from them. I think Kevin Ryan will stick with Jones as well as a few other credible peeps.

[Fallious]

[andyb]

[Andrew Johnson]

[THETRUTHWILLSETU3]

[Patrick Brown]

[chek]

I've looked again and again at the collapses and for the life of me I can't see an external force doing it. Both collapse start at or near the impact zones, with the top of the South Tower crumbling half to dust before progressing further.

To say 'beam weapon' and leave it at that, we might as well say 'magic'.
From what I can find so far about energy beams, flesh gets fried and inanimate objects seem fairly immune.

It'll be interesting to see what effect Jones' leaving will have on the technician's as opposed to the humanities crowd at ST911, if any.
July seems a long way away...

[kbo234]

AndyB is surely right on this. We have to remember that the overwhelming imperative for 9/11 truthers is to be effective propagandists....for the puposes of converting Joe Public and convincing sceptics of our case.

We need to continue trumpeting the simple undeniable issues re controlled demolition of the 3 WTC's. This is our trump card. The fact that the media continues to refuse to show the collapse of WTC7 remains a shocker for everyone who is presented with the evidence for the first time.

It is quite hard to stick to these simple issues though, one must admit.

[Thermate]

[Snowygrouch]

Can't say I`m surprised, in fact I`m pleased.

If he'd have stayed in st911 it would have been to stay in a sinking ship.
I`m not prepared to say if its as a result of "shills" or perhaps threats on ST911 members.

I suspect good old fashioned academic snobbery, which is far more prevalent than you might think amoung "educated people".

With many scientists a philosophy of "if it wasnt my idea it must be wrong" abides.

I belive this is what we are faced with in this case.

As for Feltzer; well the email exchange with him I posted here a couple of weeks ago says it all really. I think he's put his chips down on the wrong side of the board; he has probably realised that but its a bit too late now that that he's played his hand by bedding with the spacemonkeys ohh.....er I mean "engineers" (chuckle chuckle ) who propogate these theories which are somewhat lacking in empirical, logical and theoretical basis. (I SAY somewhat, what I really mean is totally).

Oh well, just goes to show you what `playing with fairly tales` can do in a serious game where such activities have no place in the public arena.

To show you what ST911 became they REFUSED to give me student membership (kept saying it would be next week etc) and NEVER even replied to any of my emails stating I actually HAD the black box data from flight 77 and it proved a cover-up.

The bloody BBC showed more interest in that than ST911 did!!!!!!

Live and learn people; if you want to b* it all up you know what to start believing..................

C.

[Abandoned Ego]

[chek]

[paul wright]

What's wrong with these people? Did they never watch Life of Brian?
I'm a long term adherent to the hologram theory, though not the blue screen one, and have suspected from the outset that an interferometric device, though not a 'beam' weapon, was involved. But have never for one moment wished to push those ideas, let alone fall out and squabble over it.
How unutterably stupid. Hope the conference resolves or produces the irrefutable evidence
The scornful Randi-mediated left will no doubt make a meal of it, in fact already are

http://westyorkshiretruth.aceboard.com

[outsider]

I suggest you all count to ten, then swot up on USS Liberty. That's the way forward, folks; and yes, any 'hostiles' would do well to swot up on it too - but you won't be able to do s-d all about it! It is going to take 911 Truth to a new dimension.

[Snowygrouch]

Yes a I`ve been speaking to a manager at BBC news planning for two months; trouble is they`ll only run the story if I can get an expert witness to go on-air and agree with my findings.

I have one VERY qualified man who knows whats going on but also knows he`d 'compromise his career' (loose his job) if he did go public.

Got a phone call from his boss 3 weeks ago politely saying, basically "piss off".

What are you gonna do?

C.

[andyb]

[Andrew Johnson]