Chuck,<\/p>\n
I see nothing but bluster, credentialism and appeal to authority in your statement.\u00a0 No specifics, period.\u00a0 Years ago my Ph.D. seminar economics professors (U. Wisconsin) told the Ph.D. students: \"If you can't explain what your dissertation is about in 25 words or less, you don't know what you're talking about.\"\u00a0 Still a sound advice.\u00a0<\/p>\n
I'm not going to spend a couple of days studying your vast contributions to the science of 9\/11, I just want your defense of\u00a0 your bottomline assertions about thermite\/thermate and nukes: \"I consider my original research work to be most convincing as do many other people concerning nano Thermate\/Thermite and Explosives, maybe even nuclear mini bombs...I have shown that nanoThermate & High Explosives with Shape Charges involved and possibly mini nukes can explain all of her 43 points that she points out that need to get an adequate explanation.\"\u00a0 I do not buy your assertions for a minute.\u00a0 I've assisted in their explosion in a recent, short article with links to my previous work with Dr. Wood: http:\/\/nomoregames.net\/2012\/01\/14\/collapse-of-the-thermite-thesis\/<\/a> .\u00a0 And what evidence about the WTC did Dr. Wood get wrong?\u00a0 I'm still waiting to hear on that one. Morgan,<\/strong><\/p>\n Some day you should check out my long, long ongoing Scholarship by viewing my Scholastic Quality PowerPoints with the Impossible Collapses nicely explained in terms of the most elementary Physics, Chemistry, Engineering, & Math possible, so people without elementary science educations or less that adequate scientific and math backgrounds may be able to understand them.<\/strong><\/p>\n Also, my interviews with Jim Fetzer were highly Scholastic, more than 10 of them (see \"Real Deal\" podcast archives, search: Chuck Boldwyn), with the relative science and math explained in very great detail against a visual background of my PowerPoint Posters or Tutorials\u00a0that were discussed all during each of the shows. The interviews can serve as tutorials for persons of limited but yet wanting,scientific\u00a0backgrounds, where the viewer can learn immense amounts of science & math if that person truly applies themselves to understanding the presented materials.<\/strong><\/p>\n If Judy's DEW dreamworld hypothesis turns out to be true and the correct one, then I am going to, indeed, be the Ass who bragged about demolitions, thermate, thermite, shape charges, cutter charges, and mini nukes and claimed that I had provably correct explanations.<\/strong><\/p>\n If I am \"right\", then, indeed I sould be alerting everyone so they are aware of a theory that can explain all of Judy's 43 Anomolies, yes, all of them, but you need to review my talk shows and PowerPoints to even see what I am talking about and why I have been long trying to educate the world, even hard ore\u00a0scientists,\u00a0about some of my groung-breaking explanations for\u00a0the Impossible TT Collapses.<\/strong><\/p>\n \u00a0<\/p>\n Please check out my Scholastic contributions to this, maybe, not so super-duper Scholastic 911 Truth site, but we do have some Scholars here, maybe not so scientific, but they constructively contribute in other ways by extensive internet research and investigation. There are about a dozen to maybe 20 contributers to the material contained within this site. Many members are not active contributers but may only view the material on this site. Many of the main contributers have welcomed you and indeed you are welcome...<\/strong><\/p>\n \u00a0<\/p>\n Please check out my research sometime within my lifetime or your lifetime so that you might see the feebleness of the DEW & Hutchison Field Effects as a most improbable explanation of the Impossible Collapses.<\/strong><\/p>\n To validy criticize my work, you need to validly understand it by looking at it in detail, all aspects, then you should learn why Judy's explanations of her excellent data are ludicrous and\u00a0 with out thoughtful scientific merit, in my opinion, especially when there is available my much more simple explanation that can be found to be easily believeable and quantitatively verifiable by anyone with an adequate background or anyone who can pick up the background by lisening to and observing my tutorial presentation, all of them.<\/strong><\/p>\n Evidently Jim Fetzer, respects my research and tutorial work and explanations enough to invite me to present my novel or unique ideas and explanations that could turn out to be correct, or at least very interesting to know about.<\/strong><\/p>\n If I am arrogant, as you imply via Shakespeare, then I am arogant about finding out the truth my own way and just trying to pass it along for the easily misguided lay persons who believe the Governments propaganda or believe some other fairy tale interpretation of what happened, to bring down the Twin Towers, etc.....<\/strong><\/p>\n I consider myself to have a lot of self confidence, after all, I am an expert in these elementary scientific principles that apply to the destruction of the Complex. Also, I taught these elementary topics for a living for many years.<\/strong><\/p>\n My education, training, and career experience in dealing with these scientific topics is as good or better than the vast majority of scientists out there as most scientists are not versitile in all of the required areas of science needed to explain all or near all of the results and be in the ballpark of the correct provable answer for the WTC Complex demolishments or demolitions using various explosive and incendiary\u00a0 and shape charge devices.<\/strong><\/p>\n Please review my work so we can, perhaps, maybe, have an intelligent conversation about Dr. Judy's Interpretive work and\u00a0 911 book.<\/strong><\/p>\n \u00a0<\/p>\n \u00a0<\/p>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/blockquote><\/div><\/div>\n <\/dd>\n