Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Bush-The Mastermind behind 9/11? -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: AK2004 who wrote (3090)	9/28/2003 1:30:15 PM
From: Lazarus_Long	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 20039

he conducted very limited number of tries with fairly significant sigma. Gee, that's a good way of getting invalid results. 4) even with small samples he had connections at 8,000 feet and yet he did not push it higher. 5) he tested few cellphones and some of them showed fairly erratic patterns like connecting at 8,000 feet but not connecting at half of that. And yet he did not give it any consideration Uh, in the science biz, this is what is known as a red flag, as in "SOMETHING is wrong! You'd better take another close look and keep looking until you can explain this!" All in all his results are inconclusive at best and more likely to be made up I wonder if he is an expert witness for these lawyers: Message 19348749 From akd: However, when it became evident that no Boeing 757 had actually struck the Pentagon ............................................................. 1. The Pentagon was not struck by a large passenger aircraft. physics911.org I think we already took care of this one- -and not the way he would like. The WTC towers collapsed without adequate heat stress Oh, and that one. Funny how these clowns who previously pushed the theory that burning jet fuel couldn't have done it don't want to touch it now. Too hot? I took a look over the side of Duray's hypothesis. I couldn't see the full name, but it end in "anic".