Peer-Reviewed Science Articles About 9/11 (for Walter)

[Walter]

Go ahead and list the scholars who peer reviewed his work that are not from your clickbait site.
I'll wait.

[AlaCowboy]

Aug 2, 2017 21:30:09 GMT -5 DrSchadenfreude said:

Aug 2, 2017 21:10:09 GMT -5 AlaCowboy said:

Huh?  Check the Phi Beta Kappa inductees for 1979.

Check the Gordon Rhode Dewart Prize winner for 1979.

Check the Magna Cum Laude records.

You claim to be a Brunonian. You prove it.

[Deleted]

Below:  Walter, Daleko, and Harry instantly fell for the CIA internet
 disinformation ridiculing the Journal of 9/11 Studies.
(Some guys are just too stupid to learn from their recurrent mistakes.)

[Deleted]

Aug 2, 2017 22:48:02 GMT -5 AlaCowboy said:

Aug 2, 2017 21:30:09 GMT -5 DrSchadenfreude said:

You claim to be a Brunonian. You prove it.

What proof would you have, Dung-head? 

Remember when you refused to let me fax or Email you a copy of my medical diploma?

[Deleted]

Aug 2, 2017 22:46:05 GMT -5 Walter said:

Go ahead and list the scholars who peer reviewed his work that are not from your clickbait site.
I'll wait.

Well, I know that one of them was BYU Physics Professor Stephen Jones, Ph.D.  (Did his Ph.D. work at Stanford.)

Look it up on my reference to their Journal.

[AlaCowboy]

Aug 2, 2017 22:53:47 GMT -5 DrSchadenfreude said:

Aug 2, 2017 22:48:02 GMT -5 AlaCowboy said:

You claim to be a Brunonian. You prove it.

What proof would you have, Dung-head? 

Remember when you refused to let me fax or Email you a copy of my medical diploma?

Why don't you post one of your book covers with your photo on it? Anyone as vain as you would not fail to plaster his picture on a book. "The COBAD Syndrome" is selling for $3.79 on amazon. Why don't you send me an autographed copy?

ps: It was a decent read, but rather pedantic and sophomoric. Rather crude of you to reveal to the public that you claim your daughters were "mentally disturbed."

[Deleted]

Aug 2, 2017 23:02:27 GMT -5 AlaCowboy said:

Aug 2, 2017 22:53:47 GMT -5 DrSchadenfreude said:

What proof would you have, Dung-head? 

Remember when you refused to let me fax or Email you a copy of my medical diploma?

Why don't you post one of your book covers with your photo on it? Anyone as vain as you would not fail to plaster his picture on a book. "The COBAD Syndrome" is selling for $3.79 on amazon. Why don't you send me an autographed copy?

ps: It was a decent read, but rather pedantic and sophomoric. Rather crude of you to reveal to the public that you claim your daughters were "mentally disturbed."

Well, according to the phony doctor everyone is suffering from a serious mental illness except him.
Dr. Ambrosius Aurelius indeed. What a pompous ass.

[daleko]

Aug 2, 2017 22:41:57 GMT -5 DrSchadenfreude said:

Aug 2, 2017 12:46:26 GMT -5 Walter said:

LMAO!
Unbelievable.
So, the so-called, "peer reviewed" scientific studies...EVERY SINGLE ONE OF THEM...that put forth the WTC controlled demolition theory are...wait for it....all found in one place; the website of the guy who claims there is so much peer-reviewed science about controlled demolition of the WTC.

Yes...I am pissed that I went for the click bait.
I feel dirty now.

Uh, Walter, I hate to make you, Harry, and the Cheese Burgher look like three stooges again, but here are the scientific credentials of Thomas E. Eastman, Ph.D.-- the scientist who published the second research article in the Journal of 9/11 Studies that I posted at the top of this thread.*

The guy looks like a physics genius.

Ouch!!  So much for your internet propaganda ridiculing the science research of the Scholars for 9/11 Truth.  (It's professional character assassination, etc.-- the same thing we have seen happening for years to the accurate Warren Commission critics-- DA Jim Garrison, Mark Lane, Fletcher Prouty, et.al..)

You guys have been conned out of your jock straps.

Do you feel stupid yet?  (I told you several times that there is a HUGE amount of Deep State internet disinformation attacking the scholars and scientists in the "9/11 Truth" movement.

Let me ask you a simple question.  If you were involved with PNAC, planning and implementing the 9/11 false flag op, would you want the American people to figure out that 9/11 was a PNAC false flag?


*   Timothy E. Eastman, Ph.D./  Senior Scientist

science.gsfc.nasa.gov/sed/bio/timothy.e.eastman


        Timothy E. Eastman, space plasma physicist, is known for the discovery of Earth’s low-latitude boundary layer and the discovery of gyrophase-bunched plasmas. He developed key foundations at NASA Headquarters and the National Science Foundation for major international and interagency projects, including the International Solar Terrestrial Physics program, the interagency Space Weather Program, and the Basic Plasma Science and Engineering program, and currently supports science programs at NASA Goddard Space Flight Center.

 Dr. Eastman has published over 100 research papers, primarily in space plasma physics, but also in philosophy and data systems. As a founding member of the Coalition for Plasma Science, he continues to serve the plasma science community through education and public outreach. In 1994, Dr. Eastman created a Web site for all plasma science and applications (now plasmas.org).

 He was lead editor of a book on Physics and Whitehead (SUNY, 2004) and soon after introduced a new observational-inductive framework of science, analogous to Karl Popper’s hypothetical-deductive framework.

In 2009, Dr. Eastman was awarded the Creative Advance Award from the International Process Network for “outstanding scholarly advancement of process-relational thought.” Since 2005 at GSFC, he has played a key role in over 500 Red Team reviews, many of which he organized and led, which have contributed to improved overall proposal success for Goddard scientists.

What BS, that's a pic of Joe Montana. The rest is a made up, deep conspiracy org creation and misdirection. This guy isn't real. All of those research papers, books, even public appearances are all made up as a cover to combat the lack of science in the conspiracy addict's argument that it was a deep state event. 

[Walter]

Aug 2, 2017 22:56:03 GMT -5 DrSchadenfreude said:

Aug 2, 2017 22:46:05 GMT -5 Walter said:

Go ahead and list the scholars who peer reviewed his work that are not from your clickbait site.
I'll wait.

Well, I know that one of them was BYU Physics Professor Stephen Jones, Ph.D.  (Did his Ph.D. work at Stanford.)

Look it up on my reference to their Journal.

LOL...you need to look up the word "peer" in this context. A peer isn't the guy who owns the website.

[Deleted]

Aug 3, 2017 9:41:03 GMT -5 Walter said:

Aug 2, 2017 22:56:03 GMT -5 DrSchadenfreude said:

Well, I know that one of them was BYU Physics Professor Stephen Jones, Ph.D.  (Did his Ph.D. work at Stanford.)

Look it up on my reference to their Journal.

LOL...you need to look up the word "peer" in this context. A peer isn't the guy who owns the website.

So, the excellent review article that Eastman published in the Journal of 9/11 Studies, which was edited by a Professor of Physics who obtained his Ph.D. from Stanford is not legitimate science, in your opinion?

Did you read Eastman's paper?

The real joke is the CIA-funded pseudo "journal" that they called the "Journal of 9/11 Conspiracy Theories."

If you're looking for pseudo-scientific crap, study the nonsense published by the CIA contractors-- Bazant, Popular Science, the NIST, etc.

I think it was Frank Wisner who once said that buying journalists and "academicians" to write for the CIA was cheaper than hiring prostitutes.

You and Cheese Burgher still don't understand how the CIA "Mockingbird" machinery works in the U.S.

The main difference nowadays is that those guys have a massive presence on the internet-- and their pseudo-scientific websites usually come up first on Google searches.  (That's fairly easy to pay for, if I'm not mistaken.)

(I've posted very detailed articles here on the subject several times.)

[Walter]

Aug 3, 2017 10:12:23 GMT -5 DrSchadenfreude said:

Aug 3, 2017 9:41:03 GMT -5 Walter said:

LOL...you need to look up the word "peer" in this context. A peer isn't the guy who owns the website.

So, the excellent review article that Eastman published in the Journal of 9/11 Studies, which was edited by a Professor of Physics who obtained his Ph.D. from Stanford is not legitimate science, in your opinion?

Did you read Eastman's paper?

No, it isn't legitimate.
First, Jones has a vested interest in gushing over Eastman's piece, because it adds clicks to his website.
Second, neither he nor Eastman are structural engineers, so where's the "peer" in "peer-review"?
Hell, you might as well be called a "peer", by your measure. But you aren't. And neither is Jones.

"Timothy E. Eastman, space plasma physicist, is known for the discovery of Earth’s low-latitude boundary layer and the discovery of gyrophase-bunched plasmas..."
Does that sound like a guy who knows squat about structural engineering? If so, then let's allow him to do brain surgery on people...you know...cuz he's so smart about gyro-bunched plasmas and stuff.

[Deleted]

Aug 3, 2017 10:49:00 GMT -5 Walter said:

Aug 3, 2017 10:12:23 GMT -5 DrSchadenfreude said:

So, the excellent review article that Eastman published in the Journal of 9/11 Studies, which was edited by a Professor of Physics who obtained his Ph.D. from Stanford is not legitimate science, in your opinion?

Did you read Eastman's paper?

No, it isn't legitimate.
First, Jones has a vested interest in gushing over Eastman's piece, because it adds clicks to his website.
Second, neither he nor Eastman are structural engineers, so where's the "peer" in "peer-review"?
Hell, you might as well be called a "peer", by your measure. But you aren't. And neither is Jones.

"Timothy E. Eastman, space plasma physicist, is known for the discovery of Earth’s low-latitude boundary layer and the discovery of gyrophase-bunched plasmas..."
Does that sound like a guy who knows squat about structural engineering? If so, then let's allow him to do brain surgery on people...you know...cuz he's so smart about gyro-bunched plasmas and stuff.

Walt,

    Eastman's review article is quite good.  Read it.

    I'm not going to argue with a guy who refuses to read scientific papers, or acknowledge that the government narrative about the WTC towers on 9/11 violates the laws of physics.

    (Not to mention your belief that the slender white nose cone and fuselage seen on the 9/11 Pentagon video was a Boeing 757.)

     It's obvious to me that you, Harry, and the Cheese Burgher have grossly impaired empirical and deductive skills.

    

[oujour76]

Aug 3, 2017 13:45:33 GMT -5 DrSchadenfreude said:

     It's obvious to me that you, Harry, and the Cheese Burgher have grossly impaired empirical and deductive skills.

Yet still better than yours. 
 

[Walter]

Aug 3, 2017 13:45:33 GMT -5 DrSchadenfreude said:

Aug 3, 2017 10:49:00 GMT -5 Walter said:

No, it isn't legitimate.
First, Jones has a vested interest in gushing over Eastman's piece, because it adds clicks to his website.
Second, neither he nor Eastman are structural engineers, so where's the "peer" in "peer-review"?
Hell, you might as well be called a "peer", by your measure. But you aren't. And neither is Jones.

"Timothy E. Eastman, space plasma physicist, is known for the discovery of Earth’s low-latitude boundary layer and the discovery of gyrophase-bunched plasmas..."
Does that sound like a guy who knows squat about structural engineering? If so, then let's allow him to do brain surgery on people...you know...cuz he's so smart about gyro-bunched plasmas and stuff.

Walt,

    Eastman's review article is quite good.  Read it.

   

    

[/font][/quote]

I've read what you posted by engineers and a few you didn't. I don't quite get why you believe a plasma physics guy over a bunch of structural engineers and think I should read it and care, but such is the zany reality that you inhabit.

[daleko]

Aug 3, 2017 13:45:33 GMT -5 DrSchadenfreude said:

Aug 3, 2017 10:49:00 GMT -5 Walter said:

Walt,

    Eastman's review article is quite good.  

    

It looks good to you because it feeds your end game and you don't have the edu to critically evaluate it.