Evan Burton Posted April 12, 2008 Share Posted April 12, 2008 Borg blah blah blah Borg blah Borg blah blah.Yes Peter. --------------- Moderator Moderate Thy Self! Why? Am I not allowed an opinion? Peter continues to tag various members as "Borg". I've used that in a sarcastic post. If he wants me to stop using it, then he should stop referring to people who disagree with him as Borg. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Hogan Posted April 12, 2008 Share Posted April 12, 2008 The problem is that when you chrunch numbers you get some minisculefration of a percent of "this or that group of professionals" supports the claims of the truthers I believe at last count about 20 of the 100,000 or so licensed structural engineers has done so. Well said. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Len Colby Posted April 12, 2008 Share Posted April 12, 2008 Typical of Len.Always specific with facts! Never makes to much of a phrase or isolated instance! Never willing to overgeneralize.! Always sceptical of the government that forgot the Maine, Tonkin Gulf and WMD! Never stooping to glib dismissal! LOL Is this and "Ad hom?" Go back and read his last post again. Translation - "I can't refute the points you are making so I will bring up irrelevant points and falsely claim that you normally aren't "specific with facts" and weren't in you post." You want specifics Nathaniel? According to the National Science Foundation in 2001, there were 1,256,400 engineers employed in the US, 40,500 of them worked in the construction industry. These numbers don’t include retired engineers or those working in other functions (i.e. as professors or non-engineering jobs). Nor does it account for population growth in the last 6 – 7 years. According to the 2001 World Fact Book the US Population in July 2001 was 278,058,881, according to the 2008 edition the population in July 2007 was 301,139,947 an increase of 8.3% assuming a proportional increase in engineers last year there should have been 1,360,690 working in the US, 43,860 of whom worked for the construction Now go to the lists of engineers at AE911T and Patriots for Truth etc only count those who are employed as engineers in the US and actually question the “official story”, PfT inflates their lists by including people who’ve made comments they interpret as contradicting the official story but who haven’t actually said they don’t believe the WTC collapse theory. IIRC you’ll get a total of about 30 engineers, perhaps 40 or 50, even if you got 136 that would be 0.01%. I’ve made similar posts based on membership in the American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE) and American Institute of Architects (AIA) and licensed pilots and people who were at the WTC on 9/11. Always the number of people from these groups comes out to less than 0.01% of the total. If you looked at the FDNY and NYPD you would get silir results probally even lower numbers. Now I don’t expect every one who believes “9/11 was an inside job” etc to come forward, but what is a reasonable portion to expect? One in 100, 500, 1000? Why does it seem the more you know the LESS likely you are to subscribe to such theories? Sources NSF http://www.nsf.gov/statistics/nsf05313/pdf/tab1.pdf 2001 World Fact Book http://workmall.com/wfb2001/united_states/...tes_people.html 2008 WFB http://www.theodora.com/wfbcurrent/united_...tes_people.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Len Colby Posted April 12, 2008 Share Posted April 12, 2008 (edited) The problem is that when you chrunch numbers you get some minisculefration of a percent of "this or that group of professionals" supports the claims of the truthers I believe at last count about 20 of the 100,000 or so licensed structural engineers has done so. Well said. Oooh I misspelled the words 'minuscule' and 'fraction' and forgot to put a space between them (or didn't hit the space bar hard enough) how can I ever live down the shame?! PS That should have read "100,000 or so licensed civil engineers". I will make a correction forthwith. Edited April 12, 2008 by Len Colby Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Len Colby Posted April 12, 2008 Share Posted April 12, 2008 Borg blah blah blah Borg blah Borg blah blah.Yes Peter. --------------- Moderator Moderate Thy Self! Why? Am I not allowed an opinion? Of course NOT Evan! Only those who agree with the majority should be allowed to post here, especially if they are a moderator. Shame on you for asking such a ridiculous question! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Hogan Posted April 12, 2008 Share Posted April 12, 2008 The problem is that when you chrunch numbers you get some minisculefration of a percent of "this or that group of professionals" supports the claims of the truthers I believe at last count about 20 of the 100,000 or so licensed structural engineers has done so. Well said. Oooh I misspelled the words 'minuscule' and 'fraction' and forgot to put a space between them (or didn't hit the space bar hard enough) how can I ever live down the shame?! PS That should have read "10,000 or so licensed structural engineers" I think I conflated the number of Civil and structural engineers. I will make a correction forthwith. Forum members have grown used to your spelling peccadillos. I didn't even bother using "sic." I was referring to your wonderful grammar and syntax. As long as you chose to make an issue of it, you forgot chrunch. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nathaniel Heidenheimer Posted April 13, 2008 Share Posted April 13, 2008 Borg blah blah blah Borg blah Borg blah blah.Yes Peter. --------------- Moderator Moderate Thy Self! Why? Am I not allowed an opinion? Of course NOT Evan! Only those who agree with the majority should be allowed to post here, especially if they are a moderator. Shame on you for asking such a ridiculous question! So you wise moderators who agree with the majority of corporate media "thought" can characterize another's post as "blah blah blah" and it is not considered in need of moderation. got it. Geez Your descent is speeding up! So glad you are qualified as a moderator! Do you write for one of Murdochs 3,500 publications. You blah quite well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Evan Burton Posted April 13, 2008 Share Posted April 13, 2008 Blah blah Borg blah. Yes Peter. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Hogan Posted April 13, 2008 Share Posted April 13, 2008 Of course NOT Evan! Only those who agree with the majority should be allowed to post here, especially if they are a moderator. Shame on you for asking such a ridiculous question! The administrator of this Forum seems to have a less restrictive view: I am also sorry that members of the forum stop posting because of the presence of people like Len Colby and Tim Gratz. However, I will not ban them from this forum because I will not resort to the methods of right and left-wing dictatorships. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Len Colby Posted April 13, 2008 Share Posted April 13, 2008 Of course NOT Evan! Only those who agree with the majority should be allowed to post here, especially if they are a moderator. Shame on you for asking such a ridiculous question! The administrator of this Forum seems to have a less restrictive view: I am also sorry that members of the forum stop posting because of the presence of people like Len Colby and Tim Gratz. However, I will not ban them from this forum because I will not resort to the methods of right and left-wing dictatorships. Mike in case you missed it I was being sarcastic. The “majority” I was referring to was the majority of forum members. A small part of that majority unfortunately is quite intolerant of contrary views and gets offended that they are expressed here especially when expressed by me and by Evan because he is moderator. When Peter essentially posts “blah, blah blah” over and over again no one (except Evan and I) objects. When Evan responds “blah, blah, blah” people react as if it were some horrible offense. I haven’t seen any evidence that anyone has stopped posting here because of me. If anyone did that’s their problem (and that seems to be more or less John’s position). There are forums were posting of contrary opinions is forbidden or strongly discouraged, those who can’t bear to have their views challenged perhaps will be happier on one of them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nathaniel Heidenheimer Posted April 13, 2008 Share Posted April 13, 2008 (edited) Blah blah Borg blah.Yes Peter. WHY I BLAHG I would like the distinguish my blahging as principled blahging, as distinct from the unprincipled blahging of this rapidly evolving blahgosphere. Until recently I had hovered on the edge of the blahgers flashing wingtips. Now, with others scared away from the forum by the sound of bellicose blahging, I am trying to give those unprincipled blahgers a taste of their own blah. I hope I have thus distinguished myself as a principled blahger, who is of an etirely different social class from those vulgar and frequently australian unprincipled blahgers. Edited April 13, 2008 by Nathaniel Heidenheimer Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Hogan Posted April 13, 2008 Share Posted April 13, 2008 Mike in case you missed it I was being sarcastic..... Apparently you missed it. So was I. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Len Colby Posted April 17, 2008 Share Posted April 17, 2008 The Israeli newspaper Ma’ariv has reported that Israel’s former Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has publicly said the September 11 attacks have been good for Israel. Netanyahu said, “We are benefiting from one thing, and that is the attack on the Twin Towers and Pentagon, and the American struggle in Iraq." Netanyahu then reportedly said that these events “swung American public opinion in our favor.” Netanyahu’s comments came during a conference at Bar Ilan University. And he’s right of course! But… France and the Netherlands etc benefited greatly from Pearl Harbor; do you think they were responsible? The Spanish Socialist party benefited greatly from the Madrid train bombings; do you think they were responsible? Pro-democracy groups in Argentina benefited greatly from the failed invasion of the Falklands; do you think they were responsible? McCain benefited from Giuliani’s inept campaign strategy, do you think he was responsible? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scott Deitche Posted April 18, 2008 Share Posted April 18, 2008 I think Peter Lance has done by far the most credible work on the 9/11 consipiracy- the conspiracy of ineptitude and politics that allowed the plan to germinate unabated, since the early 1990s. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cliff Varnell Posted April 22, 2008 Share Posted April 22, 2008 Dr. Steven Jones et.al. Published in Peer Reviewed Civil Engineering Journal http://crimesofthestate.blogspot.com/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now