Friday, May 29, 2009

The Science of 9/11



video link from: Facts Not Fairies


Richard Gage's 9/11 presentation in Clovis, CA covered by KMPH Fox 26




Richard Gage, member of Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth, is interviewed on KMPH Fox 26 in Fresno, California, about the events of September 11, 2001.

2 comments:

  1. Remember: Important Point For Inductive Process Is NOT, What Is Proven?--But Rather, What Is Dis-Proven?--And It's Not "Conspiracy"
    (Apollonian, 29 May 09)

    Don't forget the way INDUCTIVE evidence and logic works--not only for 9-11, but for any scientific inquiry:

    (a) First, one observes and considers the particular details, as many as possible, practical.

    (b) These details then indicate and lead to possible conclusion(s).

    (c) And now, the possible conclusions are simply DIS-PROVEN, one by one, and the one left, or the one which is least "dis-proven," is the necessary answer--even if only still "provisional."

    And remember, this (above process) is the ONLY POSSIBLE manner such INDUCTION (science) can possibly work.

    "Conspiracy" then isn't necessarily the pre-conceived fixation going in--it has to be one of the possibilities given fm details of evidence considered.

    And again, in all science, reason, and logic, note the "conspiracy" possibility must be disproven--there's NO alternative. It won't do to make fun of "conspiracy theorists"--which is actually fallacy of "ad hominem," attacking the person, rather than the theory (and evidence) itself.

    And note when one observes this ad hominem tactic is continuously, consistently used (and note by who?), one must observe that it itself become yet another detail for evidence which must be seriously considered. Who are these who repeatedly try to subvert the investigation?--diverting proper attention?

    CONCLUSION: So note finally, the important thing, issue, and question for this matter of science and induction is NOT "what is proven"?--but rather, what is DIS-PROVEN? And so far, we see conspiracy is NOT disproven. So who now are most likely conspirators?--who are the real masters of conspiracy? Honest elections and death to the Fed. Apollonian

    ReplyDelete
  2. [I amended and extended the conclusion for the conspiracy element to above essay--it's much more telling. Indeed, I have two further versions, below. Is gov.'s "conspiracy theory" the best? A.]

    * * * * *


    CONCLUSION: So note finally, the important thing, issue, and question for this matter of science and induction is NOT "what is proven"?--but rather, what is DIS-PROVEN? And so far, we see conspiracy is NOT disproven. So who now are most likely conspirators?--who are the real masters of conspiracy?--who are most perfectly set-up for conspiracy?--and what are circumstances for such conspiracy?--would control of mass-corporate news-media be serious factor for such conspiracy? Honest elections and death to the Fed. Apollonian

    * * * * *


    ...
    And so far, we see conspiracy is NOT disproven. So who now are most likely conspirators?--who are the real masters of conspiracy?--is there a HISTORY of conspiracy?--who are most prominent conspirators?--who murdered the men of the crew of USS Liberty (see UssLiberty.org) and got away with it?--who are most perfectly set-up for conspiracy?--and what are circumstances for such conspiracy?--would control of mass-corporate news-media be serious factor for such conspiracy? Honest elections and death to the Fed. Apollonian

    ReplyDelete