Well last night Wednesday, Sep 10, 2014 I saw a FaceBook friend, Luciano Guerriero an otherwise nice fellow that I went to college with ages ago at SUNY Purchase (and NOT the Italian physicist!) post a high charged case of 9/11 Denial (or what they call 9/11 Truth). Well I challenged some of the outrageous claims and assertions he was making as well as criticizing his overblown sense of authority on the topic and he unfriended and banned me. What a surprise! Here is the discussion as I saved it until Luciano banned me.
Luciano Guerriero – Wednesday, September 10 at 9:49pm · New York, NY ·
What threat to us is there, exactly? This doesn’t pass the smell test.
“America will lead a broad coalition to roll back this terrorist threat. I will not hesitate to take action against ISIL in Syria, as well as Iraq. This is a core principle of my presidency: if you threaten America, you will find no safe haven.” — Pres. Obama, 40 minutes ago.
3 people like this.A Fellow with the Initials G.L.I. – The threat is terrorism, what else could it be; the kind that brought down the WTC, but I don’t see ISIL’s power as making that any more possible than it already was. It only takes a small group to pull off a terrorist act. In short, I’m with you on this Luciano.
Wednesday, September 10 at 9:58pmA Fellow with the Initials M.K.E. – The threat is to American access to Middle Eastern Oil Wells, don’t ya know!
Wednesday, September 10 at 9:59pmLuciano Guerriero – Nail on the head.
Wednesday, September 10 at 9:59pmThe Fellow with the Initials G.L.I. again – Former Iraqi Deputy PM Barham Salih said some in the US hoped that #Iraq was no longer their problem but “ISIS demonstrated otherwise.” He added “military power has its limits. #ISIS and extremism come up through the cracks of the political system.”
Wednesday, September 10 at 10:00pmThe Fellow with the Initials M.K.E, again – So, Luce, I see you now understand why it is critical that to stop this threat from ISIL in Syria and Iraq, we must nuke Tehran!
Wednesday, September 10 at 10:00pmThe Fellow with the Initials G.L.I. again – Of course, of course.
Wednesday, September 10 at 10:01pmLuciano Guerriero – We arm and equip the precursor in Syria so that they would fight Assad as our proxy, and then we call the formation of the Frankenstein monster that we helped create a grave threat to OUR security, and then we use that as an excuse to resume military operations in the theater. That is one form of a false flag operation.
Wednesday, September 10 at 10:05pmA Fellow with the Initials J.E. – This is what a proactive counterterrorism policy smells like. The threat is clear and present. Just ask England – they are already at their highest terrorist alert. Most disturbing is that we are still acting as the world’s policeman – coalition building has a long way yet to go.
Wednesday, September 10 at 10:10pmLuciano Guerriero – So called “proactive counterterrorism policy” is as bogus as a twelve dollar bill. It is a blanket pretext for this country to project hard power into regions that have resources that we covet, and to establish a permanent military presence. This country is heading for a huge fall of its own making.
Wednesday, September 10 at 10:14pm
A Fellow with the Initials S.S. – Steve Sussman I’m confused as to whether it’s “ISIL” or “ISIS.” I mean, we still don’t have a consensus on the spelling of “Qaddafi.”
Wednesday, September 10 at 10:18pm · Edited · LikeReply
The Fellow with the Initials J.E. again – We will once again have to respectfully disagree. We still criticize Bush Jr. for his supposed ignorance relative to the al-Qaeda threat prior to 9-11. I will accept the President’s premise. Love and kisses to you personally.
Wednesday, September 10 at 10:20pm · LikeReply
And here is where the 9/11 Denial jumps in a rears it’s ugly fallacious head.
Luciano Guerriero – Al Qaeda didn’t attack us on 9/11. At least seven of the supposed hijackers were found alive in their home countries and interviewed in the weeks following that charade. There was careful planning there before that day. Bush had the invasion plan for Afghanistan placed on his desk on Sept. 10th. No black boxes were found but a pristine, unscorched passport of one of the alleged hijackers was found on the street 8 blocks away — but no other debris or intact items from the plane. Thousands of American physicists, architects, engineers (etc) signed a statement calling the official 9/11 Report by NIST a crock of shit. There were no wing or engine marks made in the façade of the Pentagon, and thousands of airline pilots signed a statement saying that supposed maneuver by the “plane” that hit the Pentagon almost surely would have torn it to pieces before it reached the building, and that such a poorly trained pilot could never have accomplished it. The official claim was that the titanium from the engines that supposedly hit the Pentagon melted in the inferno, yet many bodies or body parts of Pentagon personnel somehow survived that same inferno and were recovered — but no black boxes there either.
The list of items casting grave doubt on the official version of the events on 9/11 could go on another 20,000 words, at least. But my point is, the credibility of our government is reasonably in serious doubt. We’ve been demonstrably lied to again and again. Ulterior motives abound. Unless or until they prove to us that their word is trustworthy, the official explanation on just about anything ought to pass some extreme skepticism and hard questioning before it deserves to be believed.
Wednesday, September 10 at 10:40pmA Fellow with the Initials R.W. – You say ISIL, I say ISIS. Let’s call the whole thing off!
Wednesday, September 10 at 10:52pm
And then I jumped in…Jerrald Hayes Luciano—“Thousands of American physicists, architects, engineers (etc) signed a statement calling the official 9/11 Report by NIST a crock of shit.”—
And what an incredible crock of shit that is.
I once upon a time did the math on that claim that “Truthers” often make and aside from the fact the the Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth group doesn’t have in anyway (can’t agree on) a reasonable alternate hypothesis the what did happen to bring the towers down as an argument of authority the letter they signed is worth the cost of the paper.
The thousands you claim in your statement was really only 1,750 architectural and engineering professionals (and they then had 16,000 everyday wackaloon supporters sign their statement too).
Here’s the killer math for you the AIA estimates the number of architects licensed in the United States at 105,847 and the total number of P.E. licenses in the United States is more than 800,000 that comes to 905,847 architects and engineers. That big huge number of 1,750 signatories only amounts to 00.19% (2/10ths of 1 Percent) of all the architects and engineers in the U.S.
I am pretty confident if you were to poll all the physicists in the U.S. at least 2/10ths of a percent of them think the earth is flat and/or only 5,000 years old.
The percentage of global warming and climate change denying climate scientists is a 15 times larger percentage than the number of Architects and Engineers that deny what really brought down the towers on 9/11.
Wednesday, September 10 at 11:47pm
Jerrald Hayes Noam Chomsky on Truthers http://www.openculture.com/…/noam-chomsky-derides-911…Noam Chomsky Schools 9/11 Truther; Explains the Science of Making Credible Claims
www.openculture.comWe don’t often write up videos posted by 9-11 Truthers, but you can watch an interesting exchange when this particular Truther confronts well-known linguist and political observer Noam Chomsky during the question session after the latter’s talk at the University of Florida.Wednesday, September 10 at 11:49pm
Luciano Guerriero – Well, Jerrald, you can believe that tripe if you like, if it’s more comfy for you. But you fail to see that most of those you name want nothing to do with speaking to the issue because they fear the potential consequences of speaking the truth about it. I will grant this much — that there are a lot of cockamamie conspiracy theories out there, most of which come from incompetent people, so if one is interested in finding the real story one has to wade through a lot of that crap and rule it out. But I have a bit of a background in science, and I can recognize good science when I see it, and when the physics involved just could not possibly support the claims of the NIST report, then we know the official version of those events is false. And if it’s false, as it surely is, then it becomes an investigation into what did happen instead.
From the best evidence available, some things can be ruled out with a high degree of certainty, and some things can be ruled in with a high degree of certainty. It never takes a majority to prove any scientific fact, does it? If it did, most of the breakthroughs and discoveries over the centuries would never have happened. I am not an irrational, tin foil hat wearing “wackloon”, bud. I’m a rational person who worked in NYC law enforcement who happened to be outside the South Tower when it fell. What I witnessed, and more importantly what I have discovered as a result of my rigorous investigation since then, informs my views on the matter. I am content to make my statements, and to shrug off propaganda like yours and like the government has worked to sell to us all.
Thursday, September 11 at 12:02am
Jerrald Hayes – WOW! —“But I have a bit of a background in science, and I can recognize good science when I see it, and when the physics involved just could not possibly support the claims of the NIST report,”—
Really a big huge argument of authority about science from an actor? Hey I’m a builder, and ex-fire fighter, and a science geek which I can argue gives me more authority than you yet I STILL WOULDN’T EVER MAKE SUCH AN OUTRAGEOUSLY ARROGANT AN ENGINEERING CLAIM and you just made bucking the consensus opinion of so many much more qualified professionals (and the 99.81% of the nations architects and engineers that DON’T buy into the wackaloon 9/11Truther conspiracy theories.)
It funny too when I saw the towers come down the first thing I though of was a fire I was at an auto dealership in Mt. Kisco years ago. The raging fire inside caused the floor and roof trusses to bend and then torqued the supporting walls and the building collapsed. The official explanation of what brought the buildings down that came out months later after a long review made perfect sense to me within seconds after it actually happened.
—“It never takes a majority to prove any scientific fact, does it? If it did, most of the breakthroughs and discoveries over the centuries would never have happened.”—
So then using that reasoning you would argue against the consensus opinion regarding climate change too?
—“I am not an irrational, tin foil hat wearing “wackloon”, bud.”—
Well I didn’t think that until this evening but I certainly might now.
—“I’m a rational person who worked in NYC law enforcement who happened to be outside the South Tower when it fell. “—
And if you are a rational logical thinker I wonder what relevancy you think a claim like that has. Really!
—“What I witnessed, and more importantly what I have discovered as a result of my rigorous investigation since then, informs my views on the matter.”—
I don’t think your investigation is nearly as rigorous as you may think it was and I think you are probabley a textbook example of ‘Confirmation Bias’ in action because you know what?…. I also conducted my own investigation into all the claims being made by 9/11 truthers and I have come to an opposite conclusion than you have. And I’m sure many other people both with better and worse qualifications than you and I have too and I’m confident I’m in same room with 99.81% of those people while your in the room with only 00.19% of them.
—“I am content to make my statements, and to shrug off propaganda like yours and like the government has worked to sell to us all”—
And about that government conspiracy….
Skeptic Presents: You Can’t Handle The Truther
In this video—the third in our series of videos that promote science and critical thinking through the use of humor, wit, and satire—CIA Agents plot the 9/11…Thursday, September 11 at 12:29am
Jerrald Hayes – Myles Power who is I’’m pretty confident is many times more scientifically qualified and oriented that you and I are combined took a look at the claims made by 9/11 Truthers and I posted them together on my blog a year ago…
9/11 Twelve Years Later rationallythinkingoutloud.com It’s 9/11 today and I guess I shouldn’t be at all surprised that I’ve gotten a bunch of emails today from friends and acquaintances who are part of the 9/11 Truther Movement,….sigh. I don’t have …
Thursday, September 11 at 12:37am
Luciano Guerriero Is it possible for an actor to have a science background and only later decide to change course and work in the arts? Or are you seeing me through the eyes of false assumption and prejudice?
And is it “confirmation bias” to read and view eyewitness accounts from literally dozens of people, including surviving firefighters with long experience in such matters, all of whom speak about charges detonating in the basement and sub-basement of the towers? Is it “confirmation bias” to remember the sound of detonations going off low in the South Tower BEFORE the collapse of the top commenced?
You’ve obviously bought into your point of view, and as I said I have satisfied my own intellectual curiosity, so I suggest that we end this here and now. The rancor and incivility already on display speaks poorly to the prospects for fruitful exchanges. So I’m going to respectfully agree to disagree. That’s enough.
30 minsJerrald Hayes I’m saying I have science, building, and firefighting qualifications but I DON’T PRESENT THEM TRYING TO MAKE AN ARGUEMENT OF AUTHORITY.
—”Is it “confirmation bias” to remember the sound of detonations going off low in the South Tower BEFORE the collapse of the top commenced? “— and you know how reliable eyewitness testimony is especially in stressful environments. I am however 100% sure you THINK you heard detonations going off. Maybe those secret super-thermite charges that were planted on all those columns way above you on those upper floors without anyone of all the people that worked in the World Trade Center towers reporting the suspicious activity in the weeks prior. Yeah those explosions, yeah right. Okay I’m convinced, now I believe you might be right about the tower coming down being an inside job. Yeah right.
By the way you need to do some Bayesian thinking on this and really consider what has to happen for the 9/11 Truther hypotheses to be actually true. Without debunking virtually every point the Truthers make that probability make the alternative hypotheses ridiculously impossible.
I think this kind of incredible science denial hurts liberalism.
I then went to bed and found this personal message to me when I checked into FaceBook this morning and found myself unfriended and blocked by Luciano Guerriero’s account….
Respect and grace would have been letting it drop when I told you on my page that it had gone on long enough. On your own page, carry on to your heart’s content.
You’ve now crossed the line into the pig-headed bore category. Sayonara!
Respect yeah right. I have as much respect for 9/11 Truthers as I do for Flat Earthers and Young Earth Creationists. And talk about a ‘pig-headed bore” who won’t and can’t walk the talk he parades around with.