"Where are all of the NIST physicists/scientists (or from other agencies) willing (and with employer permission) to publicly appear and debate Jones/Gage point-for-point? ... Where are their scientific reports of using the samples within their possession (and without questionable collection, storage, and chain-of-custody issues) to repeat Jones' experiments and validate/disprove their assertions?"
And your lame-o non-answer?
"The fact that real scientists are unwilling to waste their time debating snake oil salesmen is nothing more then a straw man argument and proof of only how little in the way of actual facts the truhtiness movement has."
NIST is a government agency that has received millions to research 9/11 supposedly completely and thoroughly. Given that 9/11 is the basis for billions (no, probably trillions) invested in multiple wars, homeland security, and other knee-jerk measures, it behooves us as a nation to find out if 9/11 (as told to us) is fact or fiction. The investment in a few scientists to officially validate/disprove Jones would be tiny but invaluable, as would sponsoring them in some public debates.
I think the work has already been done, but was likely edited out or buried by superiors trying to CYA... not only their own but that of who appointed them.
"As well as the repeated lies that does that disagree with the dogmatic views of the truthiness movement must be government agents, sent out to discredit them."
If you Q-uack like a dump-suck D-uck, W-alk like a dump-suck D-uck, and A-ct like dump-suck D-uck...
Got another explanation for, say, GuitarBill who works as some sort of a database administrator and over the holidays somewhere bragged about taking a whole freaking month to read all 10,000 pages of one of NISTs 9/11 reports.
What?
- He did this for fun after his daytime database admin duties at the expense of his wife or kids or anything else that month?
- Or he read it on the job risking getting fired?
- Or his job in the Q group pays him to read it, as well as this site and rense.com, and to build his database to quickly copy-and-paste bullying responses to views that don't align with what the Q Group wouldn't want us to consider, much less believe?
As for you, EncinoM, maybe we should start calling you "Gilligan" or "GuitarBill's little buddy" as for your tag-team antics that would make the non-existent Q Group proud.
~TwentyTen
