Re: 9/11 Truth Group after 9 years finally appears to do something useful.
I don’t see why you keep barking up that tree as the need for updates has nothing to do with verifiability or transparency.
That is why you fail.
Furthermore, you posted a couple of their updates and Hulsey’s PHD students posted their dailyworking logs. So “none” is not correct.
All of those "updates" were posted around the time of the original press release were already months old material. Since announcing the project exists they have released
nothing new. This is substantially short of being
open and transparent throughout the entire process which is what was promised and
any rational and objective person would agree with that.
Yes. Never even got so much as "
we have received your request and will be in touch. Thanks for your interest."
Wrong as usual.
You should stop assuming that your assumptions are fact. I realize your only objective here is to not advance the discussion but rather to take as many digs at me as you can which includes taking the opposite view of mine on every issue just because,.. but you know what happens when you assume, right?
You didn’t actually think any joe blow, such as yourself, would qualify for public participation? You must register and give your qualifications in order to qualify for public participation?
Where is the list of requirements for public participation? I saw no disclaimers, no qualifiers.
Who gets to decide who is
qualified and how do they make that determination?
How come none of the other people I know who registered, who are very much qualified never even got a response either?
There you go making assumptions again.
Furthermore, they stated(which you ignored over and over), "that there is still 6-8 months of additional work, UAF student review and finalisation before it [/FONT][/COLOR]goes out to the academic community for peer review.”
I have not ignored. That is not the current topic of discussion. I'll repeat it again since you seem to ignore it over and over: this particular discussion is about broken promises of an open and transparent process that would include frequent updates, full access to data and public participation, NONE OF WHICH HAPPENED.
I would appreciate it if you would stop trying to derail the discussion away from the topic at hand.
Really? Listen to yourself. What preposterous, unheard of standard are you expecting from them. They have provided some data, and I presume they will provide the rest when completed. If they don’t provide valuable data necessary for validation, then I’ll declare their research project bogus too.
I am expecting what was promised - an open and transparent
process with full access to data, frequent and regular updates and public participation. You think its OK for them to lie, to be deceptive and dishonest. That shows more about your character than mine.
Not at all, and I’m a one person, Buck Naked, team. I suggest you wait until the process plays out, as "there is still 6-8 months of additional work, UAF student review and finalisation before it goes out to the academic community for peer review.” Then we can determine the validity of the project as well as it’s transparency.
We already have more than enough information to determine if the project is delivering on its promises. We were told the
entire process has been open and transparent with public participation and access to data. But lets look at what was actually delivered.
6 months of work in complete secrecy before the project was even announced (with an appeal for donations)
A very brief flurry of activity releasing some already months-old data and a few promo video's to give the
illusion of legitimacy.
Then nothing for almost 11 months. No updates, no newsletter, no new data. You can't even get the files to open on the old data they provided.
No updates to the web/Facebook pages since they were launched in November.
The promised newsletter never happened.
No public participation. No acknowledgement of those who tried to register. Why does anyone even need to register at all?
On a scale of 1 to 10 they score a 2
if I'm being generous.
If NIST came out and said we are going to re-study building 7 in a
completely open and transparent process with public participation and access to data throughoutand then delivered what
WTC 7 Evaluation as delivered, Truthers would be up in arms screaming with rage. But if their own team does it that's OK - they are the good guys after all and are only after the truth so a little deception and total lack of transparency is all good.
Personally my prediction is we are going to hear very little else from this project, I'll explain why later.
