John,
As a scientist, you might readily admit the publication of Dr. Harrit's paper at Bentham has nothing necessarily to do with the integrity of Dr. Harrit or Dr. Harrit's work.
So, by dropping all the fluff and innuendo of incompetency we would appropriately limit meaningful discussion to the merits and quality of the science.
In contrast I must say there is far less professional quality in your Op-Ed than in all of Harrit's work. The "tabloid" style headline for your opinion piece doesn't rise to the level of your alleged education and experience -- an anomaly that could understandably cause your work to be interpreted as a "hit piece" -- words engineered to imply that Harrit's work is "fake". This disingenuous approach provides substantial blowback against your own integrity and the integrity of OP-ED News.
Moreover, your intent to defame Dr. Harrit seems apparent when you criricize the Publisher and Harrit in the same torrent.
Very few of us as scholars and lay scholars in the consolidated bulk of the 9/11 Truth network have suspected anything more than professionally placed explosives - albeit an uncertain description. Suggesting that we're holding up "missiles disguised as planes, or directed energy weapons" with equal credibility is naive. Harrit's et al identification of a nano-thermitic that acts both as an incendiary and explosive could explain the impossibility that ejection of giant steel beams and tons of material could occur simulltaneous with the "collapse" of the Tower at near free-fall acceleration.
THE FBI KNOWS the TRUTH
The work of Architect, Richard Gage, AIA relies on the rigors of the scientific method. Gage's 2 hour multi-media presentation 9/11: BLUEPRINT FOR TRUTH was submitted to the FBI in November, 2008 as conclusive for controlled demolition, "...beyond a reasonable doubt". On December 22, 2008 we were encouraged that debunkers in the highest office of law enforcement in the United Sates had the courage to agree with the science. The FBI's Michael J Heimbach responded in writing that Gage's presentation was "backed by thorough research and analysis". VIDEO FBI LETTER
Your suggestion that the 9/11 group should get busy and "press Congress for a new investigation" comes a little late. You probably didn't know that the 9/11 group has lobbied for a new investigation for years. In fact, a New York City ballot initiative could succeed before the DOJ or Congress decides to assemble a Grand Jury.
The RULE of LAW is ENDANGERED
Thanks to the efforts of www.NYCCAN.org and the families of those murdered in the Towers this group is working to seek justice through the courts of New York City.
John, you and OP-ED News can help the families and the still-dying ground zero workers find out how and why their husbands, wives, friends and loved-ones were murdered by showing your humanity in joining the 9/11 Truth group in a demand for a new investigation of the biggest crime of mass murder in American History. The 9/11 event was used as a pretext to 2 illegal wars that might have been prevented if Congress had been allowed to complete a 9/11 investigation that was stopped by presidential order in 2002.
Instead of seeing Congress resume a 9/11 investigation with sworn testimony and subpoena power, the American people witnessed the fraud of the 9/11 Commission which was admittedly "set up to fail" in the opinion of the Chairman, Thomas Keane.
The rule of Law remains endangered even in the Obama administration while the biggest crime in American History goes without an investigation and billions in taxpayer dollars go to support infinite wars of occupation.
But still, too many smart people - even entire anti-war groups prefer to denigrate those who persue the truth of 9/11 so that Americans may finally know if the terror in the Twin Towers was a False Flag, a Bin Laden plan, or something in-between.
The 9/11 Families and the American People deserve to know.
# # # #
# # # # 911 NanoTech Thermite Publisher Accepts Fake Paper, Editors quit by John R Moffett 6/16/09: www.opednews.com Source The 911 Truth Movement has been highly vocal about the publication of an article entitled “Active Thermitic Material Discovered in Dust from the 9/11 World Trade Center Catastrophe” that was published in “The Open Chemical Physics Journal”, which is part of the Bentham Open Science Publishers group of journals. Researchers from Denmark, the United States and Australia reported that dust samples collected near the collapsed World Trade Center complex contained iron oxide and aluminum flakes whose chemical composition was consistent with unburned nanotechnology-enhanced thermite. Not just a little bit of this super thermite, but enough unburned thermite to account for a full 0.1% of the dust collected after the WTC buildings collapsed. This finding alone should have raised many questions about what the red and grey chips in the dust actually were. The subgroup of 911 Truthers who are advocating this particular theory of the WTC collapse have declared victory over those advocating the controlled demolition theory, or the missiles disguised as planes theory, or the directed energy weapons theory, or even the secret nuclear reactors in the WTC basements theory, because they now have a “scientific paper published in a peer reviewed journal” to buttress their claims. It is not surprising that the public is not aware of the fact that the so-called Bentham Open Science publishing group is basically a vanity publication where anyone can publish a “peer reviewed scientific journal article” which is not actually peer reviewed. This embarrassing fact became all too clear recently when another Bentham “peer reviewed” journal was caught publishing a fake paper submitted by Philip Davis, a PhD student in scientific communications at Cornell University. Davis used a well known computer program that was designed specifically to generate nonsense science articles which would be spotted as such by any legitimate peer review process. The fake article entitled “Deconstructing Access Points” contained wonderfully nonsensical statements such as “Note that vacuum tubes have less jagged effective floppy disk throughput curves than do autogenerated robots”. Despite making no sense whatsoever, the paper was accepted at the Bentham Publishing Groups journal “The Open Information Science Journal” as though it was peer reviewed, despite the fact that the author, Davis, never received any reviewer comments, which is a universal part of the peer review process. Instead, Davis simply received a bill for an $800 fee which was to be sent to a post office box in the United Arab Emirates. Following the disclosure of the fake nature of the article (and withdrawal of the manuscript) by Davis, the chief editor at the journal, Bambang Parmanto, resigned. "I didn't like what happened," Parmanto told reporters for The Scientist Magazine. "If this is true, I don't have full control of the content that is accepted to this journal." Following this, Marc Williams, an immunologist and stem cell researcher at the University of Rochester School of Medicine & Dentistry who served on the editorial advisory board of The Open Stem Cell Journal also resigned his position with the Bentham Group. Previously, the chief editor of the Bentham journal that the Thermite article was published in resigned, and denounced the journal with this statement: “I cannot accept that this topic is published in my journal. The article has nothing to do with physical chemistry or chemical physics, and I could well believe that there is a political viewpoint behind its publication. If anyone had asked me, I would say that the article should never have been published in this journal. Period.” Despite supposedly being the chief editor, she had not been informed that the thermite article was going to be published in her journal. The advocates for the nanotech thermite theory of the WTC collapse will never accept the fact that the Bentham Group journals are not actual peer reviewed scientific publications, but scientists all around the world are now convinced of the fact. Don’t get me wrong. I don’t believe the official story of the 911 commission report, and in fact, neither do many members of the 911 commission. But just because that story isn’t correct, it doesn’t mean that missiles disguised as planes, or directed energy weapons, destroyed the towers. It just means that the official story is inaccurate. The only way to find out what really happened is to have a large panel of independent researchers reopen the case, with access to the classified documents that would be needed to make a valid assessment of all the data. In order to facilitate that happening, the 911 Truth Movement should stop squabbling over pet theories, and concentrate on getting a new investigation with subpoena power and the authorization to view classified documents started. This will take some serious Congressional lobbying by those interested parties. So leave your favorite theories at home, and press Congress for a new investigation.
No comments:
Post a Comment