WARNING: This mail has NOTHING to do with Tor. Am 21.08.2008 um 08:13 schrieb Roy Lanek:
You watched "Zeitgeist" once too often?Oh dear ... No, but it's perhaps about time for _you_ to watch ... http://www.journalof911studies.com/ a bit say, so to have a chance to discover-once/learn-more-on Galileo, Newton, and Celsius [Fahrenheit respectively]. (About time ... anno 2008, at the least.) But be warned, journalof911studies.com collect writings by 1st orderresearchers and professionals only, or mainly: on mathematics, physics,chemistry, crystallography, engineering, etc.^1 These researchers, andprofessionals, are NOT hired muddlers, NOT damage-controllers, NOT deniers, NOR any other lackeys; in fact, they make honor to science in general, and to the branches in which they are expert in particular. (Though of course, as in many other sombre circumstances it has happened in history beforealready--guess--they have put at risk their own careers.)
Dear readers, don't trust him. He doesn't know what he is talking about and is just blindly repeating what he read on their front page.
I am a physicist myself and just wasted my time looking at that site. There is not a single "1st order researcher" and the "papers" are just ridiculous. The "peer-review" is a joke, since the peer-group are all "believers". And the statement from their front page: "the case for falsity of the official explanation is so well established and demonstrated by papers in this Journal", proofs they are breaking basic scientific rules, since intention spoils your results.
I just randomly picked out one paper (WTC 7: A Short Computation, Vol 1.) and it took just 30 seconds to find the first wrong assumption about the collaps, not to mention that he arbitrarily concludes at the end that the "falling floors encountered very little resistance", although he assumed _no_ resistance for his own calculations which resulted in a _longer_ collapse time! Seriously, although he put some awe-inspiring square roots in it, this is incredibly bad work!
It's really pathetic, if no serious journal accepts your stuff, you just create you own. It's exactly like the Creationists, who now try to give themselves a scientific appearance by calling the same bullshit "Intelligent Design".
Also, given that you have mentioned FUD [keep reading], maybe you are confused: journalof911studies.com is related to sites suchpopularmechanics.com as, say, Switzerland and New Zealand on the planet--theyare at the antipodes.
No, it's not, unfortunately they are quite similar. And FUD is equally used by governments and conspiracy theorists.
Plus, you may be missing how the thing has started ... do you? (And about the "conspiracy theories," and on how to solve your defect on knowledge andinformation, you should have got enough suggestions already.)
You are one of those dangerous persons, who don't make a difference between knowledge and assumptions.
Sven -- http://sven.anderson.de "Believe those who are seeking the truth. tel: +49-551-9969285 Doubt those who find it." mobile: +49-179-4939223 (André Gide)