View Active Topics          Latest 100 Topics          View Your Posts          Switch to Mobile

MIT Engineer Jeff King is a credible expert to listen to!

Discuss Conspiracies and Cover Ups - e.g. 9/11 Truth, JFK Assassination, New World Order, Roswell, Moon Hoax, Secret Societies, etc. whatever conspiracy floats your boat.

MIT Engineer Jeff King is a credible expert to listen to!

Postby Scepcop » 12 Oct 2009, 16:02

Would an MIT engineer endorse bullshit? I don't think so.

“Devotion to the truth is the hallmark of morality; there is no greater, nobler, more heroic form of devotion than the act of a man who assumes the responsibility of thinking.” - Ayn Rand, Atlas Shrugged
User avatar
Scepcop
Site Admin
 
Posts: 3256
Joined: 16 May 2009, 07:29






Re: MIT Engineer Jeff King is a credible expert to listen to!

Postby Nostradamus » 12 Oct 2009, 20:50

What is weird about this guy is that he says he graduated from MIT and then makes some comment about a patient.

He graduated from MIT in 1974 with a degree in biology. Who claimed this guy was an MIT engineer?
Scimitars were not available - beware January 19, 2038 is upon us.
User avatar
Nostradamus
 
Posts: 1761
Joined: 08 Aug 2009, 14:08

Re: MIT Engineer Jeff King is a credible expert to listen to!

Postby Nostradamus » 12 Oct 2009, 21:01

He's not an engineer. His presentation is baloney:

His claims of only 2 situations of such dust clouds is wrong. King claims turbidity currents and volcanic eruptions. Debris avalanches, either rock or snow, produce the same types of forms with a dense fluid formed by clastics and air.

For the 1000th time! It's not powdered concrete. It's powdered wallboard.

For the 1000th time! It's not a pyroclastic flow. That is a term used by 9-11 liars. A pyroclastic flow is hot. That's what it means. It comes from the words for hot and broken. Pyroclastic flows are 1000F and hotter. King's video shows paper swirling in the dust. It autoignites at 450. It's not a pyroclastic flow. It's a debris avalanche.

I hope this guy does his work better than he spells. It's spelled mechanism, not mechinism.
Scimitars were not available - beware January 19, 2038 is upon us.
User avatar
Nostradamus
 
Posts: 1761
Joined: 08 Aug 2009, 14:08

Re: MIT Engineer Jeff King is a credible expert to listen to!

Postby NinjaPuppy » 12 Oct 2009, 21:55

He claims that physical evidence was destroyed and the site scrubbed. OK, no problem there. Since there were government offices in those buildings, perhaps housing some highly classified documents, I can see how they might want to make sure to remove anything of a sensative nature. I've heard theories about the basement of the WTC where all sorts of things were kept.

I saw the site with my own two eyes. I took pictures of the site. He states that evidence was destroyed. Does he say anywhere who or why it was destroyed? To the human eye it was a massive pile of freakin' dust with bits and pieces of what used to be the building peeking out.

He claims that controlled demolition requires weeks of set up. Is it so hard to believe that people, other than the US government, are capable of doing this exact thing to assure that their mission would be successful? Why wouldn't a terrorist group be smart enough to orchestrate his claims? I'm sure that he's on to something here but this theory seems to be lacking a certain something. I guess it's that 'certain something' that he is looking for in his theories.
User avatar
NinjaPuppy
 
Posts: 4002
Joined: 28 Jul 2009, 20:44

Re: MIT Engineer Jeff King is a credible expert to listen to!

Postby Nostradamus » 12 Oct 2009, 22:21

He's not an engineer. He was not an engineering student at MIT.

The little of his speech that was shown was so full of errors that it is sad.

The site was cleaned up. The material was taken away. Important materials were saved. Some of the debris was recycled. Some of the debris was thrown away. Should the pile of debris have been left there for years? Some Twoofers would like to have that debris pile there till the end of time.

It's true that controlled demolition takes weeks to setup. That's evidence it didn't happen. Gage uses the strawman argument of elevator upgrades. That doesn't answer anything. Fact is no one heard the staccato of tens of floors being exploded. Why? Because it wasn't CD. No explosions. No explosives. No CD. End of story.
Scimitars were not available - beware January 19, 2038 is upon us.
User avatar
Nostradamus
 
Posts: 1761
Joined: 08 Aug 2009, 14:08

Re: MIT Engineer Jeff King is a credible expert to listen to!

Postby ciscop » 13 Oct 2009, 08:19

hahahahahahaha
just because he backs up your claims is a credible expert ?
haha how convenient

alright :-)

Jesse Ventura
the governor and ex-wwf wrestler
was a demolition expert in the USA MARINE: Seals (i think they are the elite)
and he is also a ¨credible expert¨ that beliefs 911 was an inside job with a trigged demolition inside the towers.
For every person who reads this valuable book there are hundreds of naïve souls who would prefer to have their spines tingled by a sensational but worthless potboiler by some hack journalist of the paranormal. You who now read these sentences join a small but wiser minority. Martin Gaardner (Psychology of the Psychic)
User avatar
ciscop
 
Posts: 1423
Joined: 22 Jul 2009, 12:04

Re: MIT Engineer Jeff King is a credible expert to listen to!

Postby highflyertoo » 13 Oct 2009, 09:30

ciscop wrote:hahahahahahaha
just because he backs up your claims is a credible expert ?
haha how convenient

alright :-)

Jesse Ventura
the governor and ex-wwf wrestler
was a demolition expert in the USA MARINE: Seals (i think they are the elite)
and he is also a ¨credible expert¨ that beliefs 911 was an inside job with a trigged demolition inside the towers.


Are you still saying there's no cover up. Oh yes you like the Bilderberg Puppet called Obama. So you will always be on the side of injustice?
highflyertoo
 
Posts: 400
Joined: 26 Jul 2009, 09:57

Re: MIT Engineer Jeff King is a credible expert to listen to!

Postby highflyertoo » 13 Oct 2009, 09:39

Nostradamus wrote:He's not an engineer. His presentation is baloney:

His claims of only 2 situations of such dust clouds is wrong. King claims turbidity currents and volcanic eruptions. Debris avalanches, either rock or snow, produce the same types of forms with a dense fluid formed by clastics and air.

For the 1000th time! It's not powdered concrete. It's powdered wallboard.

For the 1000th time! It's not a pyroclastic flow. That is a term used by 9-11 liars. A pyroclastic flow is hot. That's what it means. It comes from the words for hot and broken. Pyroclastic flows are 1000F and hotter. King's video shows paper swirling in the dust. It autoignites at 450. It's not a pyroclastic flow. It's a debris avalanche.

I hope this guy does his work better than he spells. It's spelled mechanism, not mechinism.


And you don't see the future, so why the French name. Nostradamus seen what exactly?
Randi was no researcher of the paranormal even though he tried half heartedly.... Shows over.
highflyertoo
 
Posts: 400
Joined: 26 Jul 2009, 09:57

Re: MIT Engineer Jeff King is a credible expert to listen to!

Postby ciscop » 13 Oct 2009, 09:56

highflyertoo wrote:
ciscop wrote:hahahahahahaha
just because he backs up your claims is a credible expert ?
haha how convenient

alright :-)

Jesse Ventura
the governor and ex-wwf wrestler
was a demolition expert in the USA MARINE: Seals (i think they are the elite)
and he is also a ¨credible expert¨ that beliefs 911 was an inside job with a trigged demolition inside the towers.


Are you still saying there's no cover up. Oh yes you like the Bilderberg Puppet called Obama. So you will always be on the side of injustice?


i will always be on the side of logic, reason and mental sanity :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:
For every person who reads this valuable book there are hundreds of naïve souls who would prefer to have their spines tingled by a sensational but worthless potboiler by some hack journalist of the paranormal. You who now read these sentences join a small but wiser minority. Martin Gaardner (Psychology of the Psychic)
User avatar
ciscop
 
Posts: 1423
Joined: 22 Jul 2009, 12:04

Re: MIT Engineer Jeff King is a credible expert to listen to!

Postby Scepcop » 13 Oct 2009, 17:00

Here is part 2 of Jeff King's speech. It contains a few extra minutes that the other video didn't have.



The video says that he is an MIT engineer. If he isn't, can you prove that he isn't? Or did you just make that up Nostradamus, cause you're desperate to discredit anyone who challenges your religious beliefs that refuses to examine evidence and only accepts data that fits into its beliefs?
“Devotion to the truth is the hallmark of morality; there is no greater, nobler, more heroic form of devotion than the act of a man who assumes the responsibility of thinking.” - Ayn Rand, Atlas Shrugged
User avatar
Scepcop
Site Admin
 
Posts: 3256
Joined: 16 May 2009, 07:29

Re: MIT Engineer Jeff King is a credible expert to listen to!

Postby Scepcop » 13 Oct 2009, 17:07

NinjaPuppy wrote:He claims that physical evidence was destroyed and the site scrubbed. OK, no problem there. Since there were government offices in those buildings, perhaps housing some highly classified documents, I can see how they might want to make sure to remove anything of a sensative nature. I've heard theories about the basement of the WTC where all sorts of things were kept.

I saw the site with my own two eyes. I took pictures of the site. He states that evidence was destroyed. Does he say anywhere who or why it was destroyed? To the human eye it was a massive pile of freakin' dust with bits and pieces of what used to be the building peeking out.

He claims that controlled demolition requires weeks of set up. Is it so hard to believe that people, other than the US government, are capable of doing this exact thing to assure that their mission would be successful? Why wouldn't a terrorist group be smart enough to orchestrate his claims? I'm sure that he's on to something here but this theory seems to be lacking a certain something. I guess it's that 'certain something' that he is looking for in his theories.


A lot of unanswered questions. We don't know a lot of things because there was never a proper investigation. They hauled the debris to Asia and had it melted, reportedly.

Terrorists cannot get past the security of the WTC to plant thermite or whatever. No way. If it was an inside job, there's no way terrorists would have such access. Nor would they be able to have NORAD stand down. Even former NORAD directors are saying that there was no way that NORAD could have malfunctioned the way it did on 9/11.

Here is an example from a former tactical director of NORAD:

http://patriotsquestion911.com/pilots.html

Capt. Daniel Davis, U.S. Army – Former U.S. Army Air Defense Officer and NORAD Tac Director. Turbine engineering specialist. Founder and former CEO of Turbine Technology Services Corp., a turbine (jet engine) services and maintenance company (15 years). Former Senior Manager at General Electric Turbine (jet) Engine Division (15 years). Decorated with the Bronze Star and the Soldiers Medal for bravery under fire and the Purple Heart for injuries sustained in Viet Nam. Also served in the Army Air Defense Command as Nike Missile Battery Control Officer for the Chicago-Milwaukee Defense Area. Private pilot.

* Statement to this website 3/23/07: "As a former General Electric Turbine engineering specialist and manager and then CEO of a turbine engineering company, I can guarantee that none of the high tech, high temperature alloy engines on any of the four planes that crashed on 9/11 would be completely destroyed, burned, shattered or melted in any crash or fire. Wrecked, yes, but not destroyed. Where are all of those engines, particularly at the Pentagon? If jet powered aircraft crashed on 9/11, those engines, plus wings and tail assembly, would be there.

Additionally, in my experience as an officer in NORAD as a Tactical Director for the Chicago-Milwaukee Air Defense and as a current private pilot, there is no way that an aircraft on instrument flight plans (all commercial flights are IFR) would not be intercepted when they deviate from their flight plan, turn off their transponders, or stop communication with Air Traffic Control. No way! With very bad luck, perhaps one could slip by, but no there's no way all four of them could!

Finally, going over the hill and highway and crashing into the Pentagon right at the wall/ground interface is nearly impossible for even a small slow single engine airplane and no way for a 757. Maybe the best pilot in the world could accomplish that but not these unskilled "terrorists".

Attempts to obscure facts by calling them a "Conspiracy Theory" does not change the truth. It seems, "Something is rotten in the State."


* Editor's note: For more information on the impact at the Pentagon, see General Stubblebine, Colonel Nelson, Commander Muga, Lt. Col. Kwiatkowski, Lt. Col. Latas, Major Rokke, Capt. Wittenberg, Barbara Honegger, April Gallop, Colonel Bunel, and Steve DeChiaro.


* Statement in support of Architects and Engineers petition:

"The government conspiracy theory does not hold up to scrutiny. As a professional with over 30 years experience working with gas turbines (jet engines) and fuels - kerosene (jet fuel) does not burn in any open flame hot enough to effect steel - well under 1000 deg F. Also bogus are the explanations regarding why no planes were intercepted. SOP [Standard Operating Procedure] is they are always, always intercepted if they stray off course and/or turn off the transponder like these flights all did. No command decision needed. Has our government ever been untruthful to us?" http://www.ae911truth.org
“Devotion to the truth is the hallmark of morality; there is no greater, nobler, more heroic form of devotion than the act of a man who assumes the responsibility of thinking.” - Ayn Rand, Atlas Shrugged
User avatar
Scepcop
Site Admin
 
Posts: 3256
Joined: 16 May 2009, 07:29

Re: MIT Engineer Jeff King is a credible expert to listen to!

Postby Scepcop » 13 Oct 2009, 17:15

ciscop wrote:hahahahahahaha
just because he backs up your claims is a credible expert ?
haha how convenient

alright :-)

Jesse Ventura
the governor and ex-wwf wrestler
was a demolition expert in the USA MARINE: Seals (i think they are the elite)
and he is also a ¨credible expert¨ that beliefs 911 was an inside job with a trigged demolition inside the towers.


Hey you said that Jesse Ventura was a smart guy, remember?

Remember the top demolition expert in Europe, Danny Jowenski (sp?) also said that Building 7 was controlled demolition. He is 100 percent sure of that.

Ok now that you mentioned Jesse Ventura, listen to what he had to say about 9/11:



“Devotion to the truth is the hallmark of morality; there is no greater, nobler, more heroic form of devotion than the act of a man who assumes the responsibility of thinking.” - Ayn Rand, Atlas Shrugged
User avatar
Scepcop
Site Admin
 
Posts: 3256
Joined: 16 May 2009, 07:29

Re: MIT Engineer Jeff King is a credible expert to listen to!

Postby Nostradamus » 14 Oct 2009, 10:33

The video says that he is an MIT engineer. If he isn't, can you prove that he isn't? Or did you just make that up Nostradamus, cause you're desperate to discredit anyone who challenges your religious beliefs that refuses to examine evidence and only accepts data that fits into its beliefs?


Who graduated from MIT with the name Jeff King. Wait! There is a person who graduated in 1974 with a degree in biology. But wait. He says in the video that he got his start from a patient. Didn't that make the mind of the pseudoskeptics wonder? Of course not.

I'm not desperate. Scepcop, you are the pseudoskeptic that takes any of this baloney hook, line, and sinker without thinking. Listen to what they say and think.
Scimitars were not available - beware January 19, 2038 is upon us.
User avatar
Nostradamus
 
Posts: 1761
Joined: 08 Aug 2009, 14:08

Re: MIT Engineer Jeff King is a credible expert to listen to!

Postby ProfWag » 15 Oct 2009, 02:13

Scepcop wrote:Here is an example from a former tactical director of NORAD:

http://patriotsquestion911.com/pilots.html

Capt. Daniel Davis, U.S. Army – Former U.S. Army Air Defense Officer and NORAD Tac Director.
Additionally, in my experience as an officer in NORAD as a Tactical Director for the Chicago-Milwaukee Air Defense


I would like to point out how tricky you conspiracy theorists are in hoping that people don't actually read what they are saying. Normally, I would have missed this as well, but my uncle (I've mentioned him before in his more current role with the FAA) actually WAS the former Deputy Commander of Operations at NORAD, holding the rank of Brig Gen (bio avail upon request through PM). When I see NORAD, my interest is peaked which is why I looked at this a little closer.
Anyway, Scepcop says "here is an example from a former tactical director of NORAD. That sounds quite impressive, until you read on. First, he was a Captain. Anyone that knows anything about military rank knows that a Captain is an almost automatic promotion after 4 years of service and they have very little hands on experience. Then, as you read on, it says he was a Tac Dir. for the Chicago-Milwaukee Air Defense. Unfortunately, I'm no longer impressed with his credentials...
Just wanted to make that clear.
User avatar
ProfWag
 
Posts: 3843
Joined: 05 Aug 2009, 03:54

Re: MIT Engineer Jeff King is a credible expert to listen to!

Postby ProfWag » 15 Oct 2009, 02:44

Scepcop wrote:Would an MIT engineer endorse bullshit? I don't think so.

Hello again Scepcop. I would like to also clarify Jeff King's "credible expert" credentials. He actually did receive an engineering degree from MIT before he became a physician in the 1970s. How about that! Oh, wait a minute. His degree was electrical engineering. Not much of a credible expert on controlled demolitions now, is he... :-)
User avatar
ProfWag
 
Posts: 3843
Joined: 05 Aug 2009, 03:54

Next

Return to Conspiracies / Cover Ups

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests

cron