You get the idea. There are other prophecies supposedly in the 9:11 texts of Moroni, Helaman, II Nephi, and Mormon. What's important here is that faith alone CAN move mountains. Apparently, faith MUST also influence movements so that prophecies may be fulfilled - http://www.latterdayconservative.com/modules/wfsection/article.php?articleid=80 .
So, back to one of the initial questions I asked, "Does it matter where the source of revelation is coming from when it concerns 9/11 Truth?" I believe it does and should – especially in this instance if what I've hypothesized about a Mormon revelation group influencing the Movement is correct.
Why does it matter? The a priori acceptance via faith that the events of 9/11 were an "inside job" bias completely any attempt to review the available evidence objectively. Instead, the sole intent of applying faith as THE first filter to any review of 9/11 evidence would be to warp the same to accommodate your prophecies and make real your revelations. Any evidence that suggests otherwise is either discredited or discarded. People who question your hypothesis (i.e., your prophesized revelation of the "truth") are either incapable of understanding the "truth" because of the lack of faith (and implied acceptance) or are disinformation agents (e.g., government-managed cointelpro) that are confirmation of the government's complicity within the prophecies. In actuality, though, these aspersions only add to already pervasive bias and result in a further distancing from the real truth that resides in objective analysis.
Science is a system of knowledge which attempts to model objective reality, while faith is a strong belief in a Higher Power that controls human destiny. Which would you want on your side when trying to explain the events of 9/11? Personally, I'll pick science to explain the collapse of the WTC structures, et al. with no offense meant to faith.
Note: With my last comments in mind, I may be construed as someone who supports the "Official Conspiracy Theory" but concerned about the connections raised by the publication of "The Shell Game". I have no concern with the book being viewed as a fictional thriller, but its use by others (especially if the relgious connections are real) is potentially troublesome.
I thought it time for a revision to the biography. Where I seem to have "disturbed" a fair number of posters here at OEN to the point they've asked me not to write about their comments, feel free to call me "troll", "shill", "neo-con lapdog", "jack-booted thug", or "bad hat Harry". They've all been applied to me over the past year because I have challenged people to think beyond the emotions of an issue and review all the available data – not just the cherry-picked stuff. Of course, this approach makes me (to many of those posters) a practitioner of cognitive dissonance and compartmentalization. And hey, when you have those going for you, how can you EVER be wrong?
Wow! A conspiracy theory that the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints is secretly advocating Steve Jones conspiracy theory about 9/11!
That would be -- a conspiracy theory squared!
However, the last time I checked, nothing squared is still nothing.
If Church-owned Deseret Book were publishing this book, you might have a tiny shred of a case. But all Latter-day Saints know that no Deseret Book publication reflects any official Church position. Cedar Fort Press is a fringe publishing house that caters to fringe Mormons.
Had Jones not accepted retirement, he probably would have been fired, because his activities were bringing disrepute on BYU. All retired professors are given office space, which does not in any way imply that BYU agrees with their opinions.
I've seen a lot of nonsense posted at op-Ed news, but this ranks right up there.
Tracy Hall Jr
by
Tracy Hall jr (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 10 comments)
on Wednesday, January 30, 2008 at 5:10:48 PM
This may be the dumbest Op Ed in the history of Op Eds. There is so much false information in here you would think Karl Rove penned it. The Mormon Church has zero to do with Cedarfort Books, an established publisher that started the Sweetwater imprint for fiction...The SHELL GAME being their debut novel. They have zero to do with 9/11 truthers. The rest of Murphy's conclusions are so laughable they are not even worth the time to address them...except for one -- his synopsis of a novel he obviously NEVER READ.
Synopsis:
The events of September 11th, 2001...the invasion of Iraq...the threat of radical Islam... an impending showdown with Iran. What do these situations have in common?
Oil. And the world is running out.
The SHELL GAME is far more than a thriller, it is a MUST-READ cautionary tale that exposes the next "9/11 event" a deception that will lead to a retaliatory chemical weapons strike on Iran and the terrorist elements the regime supports. Though the novel is written as fiction, it is filled with all-too-real details provided by insiders in the oil industry, military, and Middle Eastern affairs that extrapolates real events from the past and present that could lead us down a path of self-destruction...unless we stop the insanity now!
The story opens in 2007 when two CIA spooks meet with an American Colonel in military intelligence. The war is going badly, and President Bush, who steadfastly refuses to back down, remains unchallenged at home as Democrats and Republicans continue to toss verbal grenades – positioning themselves for the 2008 elections. Meanwhile, Iran’s pursuit of nuclear energy will yield enriched uranium within five years -- uranium that can be used to manufacture suitcase nukes.
The United States’ military is too drained to invade Iran, and a preemptive strike is out of the question...unless a nuclear detonation (suitcase bomb) were to occur on in American city -- the enriched uranium traced back to Iran. A U.S. reprisal would strike a death-blow against radical Islam, quell the insurgent violence in Iraq...and yield more oil. Yes, the cost is unthinkable – but if we sit back and do nothing then one day a dozen suitcase bombs could go off in a dozen American cities – bringing with it anarchy and the collapse of Western civilization.
December 2011: Ashley "Ace" Futrell is an oil expert working for PetroConsultants, married to Kelli Doyle, a former National Security Advisor and one of the CIA spooks from the opening scene. When Kelli threatens to expose the plot, Ace finds his existence hurtling down a rabbit’s hole of deceit where the orchestrated lies of the powerful few could lead to the darkest days of human existence... and the death knell for billions.
by
steve alten (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 5 comments)
on Wednesday, January 30, 2008 at 10:23:30 PM
"Mental" is a new label for me... Reminds me of th 70s...
"This may be the dumbest Op Ed in the history of Op Eds. There is so much false information in here you would think Karl Rove penned it. The Mormon Church has zero to do with Cedarfort Books, an established publisher that started the Sweetwater imprint for fiction...The SHELL GAME being their debut novel. They have zero to do with 9/11 truthers."
Mr. Alten, you are (of course) entitled to your opinion as to whether or not the article is "dumb". The information as itemized is not "false" and is well-sourced; however, you are more than welcome to refute any of the items. I only ask that you source the rebuttal.
"Cedar Fort publishes LDS fiction and non-fiction, generally publishing more than ninety projects each year. We are always willing to look at works that can crossover to the national market. We are currently accepting submissions for fiction, non-fiction, "How-to" books, and books about healthy living. We are always on the lookout for good cookbooks, including Dutch Oven cookbooks," - http://www.cedarfort.com/submission.html .
I don't believe I said that Cedar Fort, Inc. (CFI) has anything to do with the Mormon Church aside from publishing works geared toward the LDS community. I do speculate that LDS leadership either approved or were neutral to "The Shell Game" and its publication. Unlike the Presbyterian Church which distanced itself from Dr. Griffin's publication - http://www.pcusa.org/pcnews/2006/06596.htm , no such positioning has been tendered by LDS leadership. Granted, though, LDS leadership still has time to issue a statement where the novel was recently released.
I never claimed that CFI or its very new imprint of Sweetwater Books had anything to do with 9/11 Truthers. I'm pretty certain, though, that it's possible that the a group within the Mormon Church may be influencing or directing 9/11 Truthers based upon the belief in prophecies contained in the Book of Mormon. What you're claiming and what I'm telling you, Mr. Alten, are two different things.
My synopsis, if you note, is given at the 50,000 foot level in a few sentences, while yours – several paragraphs later – is closer to the 5,000 foot level. Regardless, I admit I have not read the entire novel, though, I have read the excerpt available on the Internet. Mr. Douglas can brief you on my take of the excerpt. However and in fair warning, my take parallels the novel's critique on Mysterious Reviews – click here.
"The rest of Murphy's conclusions are so laughable they are not even worth the time to address them..."
While a convenient "out" for you and a feigned reason why you're not responding, your silence on the issue (I trust you realize), Mr. Alten, seems to confirm the facts. You're more than welcome to present an alternate hypothesis with supporting evidence, but I think you'll find it difficult to say that the factual items are "false".
I wish you well on the novel but feel it falls far short of your past works – mostly because "The Shell Game" doesn't "know" what it wants to be – fiction or non-fiction... But such is the gamble one take when they let their "baby" leave the protection of its parent. However, like all parents, Mr. Alten, it's difficult to hear let alone believe that your baby is "ugly".
by
Tom Murphy (3 articles, 4 quicklinks, 13 diaries, 1792 comments)
on Wednesday, January 30, 2008 at 11:17:14 PM
A response from someone who makes "smarmy" comments
Now, the linked article is a much more thorough paper and probably the best produced thusfar by the Truther movement. I found this "conclusion" within the discussion interesting in that it deviates from the solid science up until that point:
"Thus, a thorough investigation which considers these data, showing extremely high temperatures and severe fragmentation in the formation of small metal-rich spheres during the WTC Towers destruction, is highly motivated. In particular, the repeatedly-delayed report on the destruction of WTC 7 on 9/11/2001... should address these striking facts."
Firstly, USGS did conduct a thorough investigation years before the publication of this recent paper. Results similar to what these researchers reported were reported then. Second, what's needed is a more extensive examination of the data (USGS, others, and these) and not yet another invesigation - http://www.ehponline.org/members/2002/110p703-714lioy/lioy-full.html .
Third, the examination should include a review of other high-rise fires involving structural steel erected at a time similar to the WTC structures to determine if similar spherules were reported. Fourth, the examination should also include the review of existing and non-impacted, structural steel high-rises to determine if residual dusts from the initial construction are the source of such spherules.
Fifth, lead-based paint (LBP) and it diffusion post demolition should also be reviewed - http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16194670 . Sixth, traffic dust and its composition should also be included in the examination - click here . And seventh, the unnecessary language of "repeatedly-delayed" used to describe the on-going WTC 7 investigation by NIST, while technically correct, fails to reflect the complexity of the investigation that this paper tends to suggest.
I have some concerns about the provenance of the samples but these seem, based upon the details presented in the report, to be much improved compared to the samples previously used by Dr. Jones.
by
Tom Murphy (3 articles, 4 quicklinks, 13 diaries, 1792 comments)
on Wednesday, January 30, 2008 at 10:31:20 PM
Yep, an utterly ridiculous response...as expected.
Now, the linked article is a much more thorough paper and probably the best produced thusfar by the Truther movement. I found this "conclusion" within the discussion interesting in that it deviates from the solid science up until that point:
"Thus, a thorough investigation which considers these data, showing extremely high temperatures and severe fragmentation in the formation of small metal-rich spheres during the WTC Towers destruction, is highly motivated. In particular, the repeatedly-delayed report on the destruction of WTC 7 on 9/11/2001... should address these striking facts."
So, what's wrong with that paragraph? Sounds very reserved and reasonable. Maybe the whole point went over your head? If NIST's reports don't take into account, or aren't revised to account for this indisputable evidence of anomalously high temperature, they are once again shown to be a laughable fraud.
Firstly, USGS did conduct a thorough investigation years before the publication of this recent paper. Results similar to what these researchers reported were reported then. Second, what's needed is a more extensive examination of the data (USGS, others, and these) and not yet another invesigation - http://www.ehponline.org/members/2002/110p703-714lioy/lioy-full.html .
LOL! Let's not pretend that this indisputable evidence of anomalously high temperature exists in a vacuum. Rather, it's just one more piece of evidence in an already overwhelming pile of evidence that the U.S. government is lying, and that 9/11 was an inside job.
(BTW, how is the study you linked to, Lioy et al., at all relevant to this "discussion"?)
Third, the examination should include a review of other high-rise fires involving structural steel erected at a time similar to the WTC structures to determine if similar spherules were reported.
What do you suggest, going back in time to collect samples?
Fourth, the examination should also include the review of existing and non-impacted, structural steel high-rises to determine if residual dusts from the initial construction are the source of such spherules.
ROTFLMAO! For that matter, how do we know that aliens from outer space didn't put the subject metal specimens there? Whoever came up with the talking points you're using is apparently getting rather desperate.
Fifth, lead-based paint (LBP) and it diffusion post demolition should also be reviewed - http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16194670 . Sixth, traffic dust and its composition should also be included in the examination - click here .
I suppose we could do silly, irrelevant things all day long, but that wouldn't be very productive; rather, that would only delay the inevitable conclusion. Yo, Goober, what they found was: "the presence of lead oxide on the surface of mineral wool", which means the lead had to have been volatilized, oxidizedand then condensed on the mineral wool. Does your car burn lead and mineral wool?
And seventh, the unnecessary language of "repeatedly-delayed" used to describe the on-going WTC 7 investigation by NIST, while technically correct, fails to reflect the complexity of the investigation that this paper tends to suggest.
Another classic! Guess what, the only reason the "investigation" of WTC7 has become so "complex", is because the people doing the "investigating" refuse to consider the only possible scenario that comports with the facts.
by
Harold Smith (0 articles, 3 quicklinks, 2 diaries, 532 comments)
on Thursday, January 31, 2008 at 8:25:26 AM
Meeting Harry's expectations one ridiculous moment at a time
"Yep, an utterly ridiculous response...as expected."
I would be sorely disappointed had I not met your expectation, Harry. I'm glad I could have been of service to you in this instance.
"If NIST's reports don't take into account, or aren't revised to account for this indisputable evidence of anomalously high temperature, they are once again shown to be a laughable fraud."
Laughable fraud is a bit of a stretch here, but I understand how you, personally, have a need to laugh (LOL, ROFL, ROFLMAO, etc...). The reports don't need to be revised to account for this "indisputable evidence of anomalously high temperature". The reports, instead, need to ensure a (1) review of the available evidence, (2) determine the range of possibilities as to what could be the source of the spherules, (3) propose a hypothesis that would best explain the presence for the spherules, and (4) test the hypothesis to ensure that the results align with what has been reported previously.
Part of the testing should be a search of scientific papers to see if similar results have been reported before for other physical processes and activities. For example, initial construction debris/dust retained within the building and traffic dusts from the surrounding area should be researched as probabilities within that range of possibility. But in no way does the existence of the globules prove "conclusively" that anomalously high temperatures were present sometime after the impact but before the completion of the collapse, this is but one probability in the wider range of possibility. Even the papers' reserachers don't argue this point, but you do!
"LOL! Let's not pretend that this indisputable evidence of anomalously high temperature exists in a vacuum. Rather, it's just one more piece of evidence in an already overwhelming pile of evidence that the U.S. government is lying, and that 9/11 was an inside job."
How do you jump from the presence of spherules to the government "lying" without having dismissed as improbable the other sources of the globules? You're telling me that the globules are present SOLELY because of some sort of high temperature (e.g., thermite/thermate) in the WTC impact/collapse event? I'm telling you that you have not demonstrated conclusively that other sources for the spherules have been ruled out satisfactorily as being probable.
You may THINK that thermite/thermate is the source because it aligns with your prior acceptance of "lying", but such wanting does not prove the actual source.
The reference to Dr. Lioy was to demonstrate that others have researched the issue of WTC dust composition. The work that's been done in the paper isn't ground breaking and was readily available elsewhere had the Truthers taken the time to search for it. It's only now that the Truthers are slapping lipstick on an old pig and calling it new and "troubling".
"Third, the examination should include a review of other high-rise fires involving structural steel erected at a time similar to the WTC structures to determine if similar spherules were reported."
"What do you suggest, going back in time to collect samples?"
"You still are a funny guy, Sully..." No, I suggest conducting a review of scientific papers that may have analyzed dust generated during and after a fire of the type I described.
"Fourth, the examination should also include the review of existing and non-impacted, structural steel high-rises to determine if residual dusts from the initial construction are the source of such spherules."
"ROTFLMAO! For that matter, how do we know that aliens from outer space didn't put the subject metal specimens there? Whoever came up with the talking points you're using is apparently getting rather desperate."
Anyone who's worked construction or demolition can testify to the abundance of dust and other "things" that become part of the structure once walls, floors and ceilings are installed. Common sense alone suggests this dust as a plausible during a building's construction, but I see, Harry, that common sense isn't your strong suit. Active brazing, weldng, and cutting occured at the WTC when it was being built, so this dust is a probable source also.
"Yo, Goober, what they found was: "the presence of lead oxide on the surface of mineral wool", which means the lead had to have been volatilized, oxidized and then condensed on the mineral wool. Does your car burn lead and mineral wool?"
Traffic dust is just one probable source of lead. Another source are the printed circuit boards (PCBs) that contained tin-lead (Zn-Pb) solder and were present in almost every office space within the towers. The omnipresence of this matterial, along with the postulated temperatures and extensive presence of mineral wool as spray-on fireproofing, could have resulted in what the paper reported. Vapor phase soldering, ironically used on PCBs, can explain how the mineral wool was coated with lead - http://www.rayprasad.com/home/rp1/page_69/smt-_vapor_phase_soldering_the_comeback_kid.html .
You shouldn't jump immediately to your "pet" conclusion just because you want to.
"Guess what, the only reason the "investigation" of WTC7 has become so 'complexi, is because the people doing the 'investigating' refuse to consider the only possible scenario that comports with the facts."
Again, what you take (at this point) as faith is only another probable cause in a range of possibility - for a scientist applying the scientific method. I'm glad for you that you hear those voices and can poke them with a Q-Tip through your ear to make them stop, but please don't tell me that I need to listen to your voices, as well.
by
Tom Murphy (3 articles, 4 quicklinks, 13 diaries, 1792 comments)
on Thursday, January 31, 2008 at 11:15:44 AM
I would be sorely disappointed had I not met your expectation, Harry. I'm glad I could have been of service to you in this instance.
Just act "normal" and you'll apparently never let me down.
"If NIST's reports don't take into account, or aren't revised to account for this indisputable evidence of anomalously high temperature, they are once again shown to be a laughable fraud."
Laughable fraud is a bit of a stretch here, but I understand how you, personally, have a need to laugh (LOL, ROFL, ROFLMAO, etc...).
The fraudulent NIST report has already been debunked, and that, and the 9/11 Commission's report, are just plain laughable.
The reports don't need to be revised to account for this "indisputable evidence of anomalously high temperature". The reports, instead, need to ensure a (1) review of the available evidence, (2) determine the range of possibilities as to what could be the source of the spherules, (3) propose a hypothesis that would best explain the presence for the spherules, and (4) test the hypothesis to ensure that the results align with what has been reported previously.
Well frankly, since the report is wrong, it does need to be revised.
Part of the testing should be a search of scientific papers to see if similar results have been reported before for other physical processes and activities. For example, initial construction debris/dust retained within the building and traffic dusts from the surrounding area should be researched as probabilities within that range of possibility.
IOW, "shit happens"? Well I suppose you gotta say somethin' contrary, no matter how implausible, right? If you had read and understood Jones' paper (and if you were an honest person, LOL!) you likely wouldn't be implying that some common process could produce microscopic spherical particles of substances with such extremely high melting points as molybdenum.
But in no way does the existence of the globules prove "conclusively" that anomalously high temperatures were present sometime after the impact but before the completion of the collapse, this is but one probability in the wider range of possibility.
Well since "conclusively" is a subjective term, and since you're obviouosly not a reasonable person, but a contrarian (and an ill-informed one at that), I doubt that even the perpetrators of the crime themselves could "conclusively prove" anything to you, if that was their intent.
Even the papers' reserachers don't argue this point, but you do!
Well of course they do! That's obviously their whole (implied) point!
"LOL! Let's not pretend that this indisputable evidence of anomalously high temperature exists in a vacuum. Rather, it's just one more piece of evidence in an already overwhelming pile of evidence that the U.S. government is lying, and that 9/11 was an inside job."
How do you jump from the presence of spherules to the government "lying" without having dismissed as improbable the other sources of the globules?
Simple: Because, under the circumstances, the only plausiblemechanism that could produce the species observed would involve the burning of a high temperature incendiary agent like thermite, thermate, etc. in conjunction with a violent physical disturbance.
You're telling me that the globules are present SOLELY because of some sort of high temperature (e.g., thermite/thermate) in the WTC impact/collapse event?
Well of course. Go look up the manufacturing process for powdered metals. The subject metal is melted and sprayed under pressure, i.e., projected into the air or an inert atmosphere where it cools and hardens into a spherical shape. What common commercial/industrial process do you suggest as an alternative?
I'm telling you that you have not demonstrated conclusively that other sources for the spherules have been ruled out satisfactorily as being probable.
You may THINK that thermite/thermate is the source because it aligns with your prior acceptance of "lying", but such wanting does not prove the actual source.
First, let's not pretend that any government agency has adequately explained why the three subject buildings collapsed in the manner observed.
Second, let's not pretend that there is no obvious effort by the government to deceive, with regard to many important aspects of the events of 9/11.
Third, let's not pretend that the subject species described in Jones' paper would be expected to be produced by some common process.
In light of all this, yes of course I THINK it's proof of what we all reasonably suspect.
The reference to Dr. Lioy was to demonstrate that others have researched the issue of WTC dust composition.
It's clear that the scope of that study was limited; Lioy et al. weren't looking for any evidence that would point to demolition. Consequently, it's purely irrelevant.
The work that's been done in the paper isn't ground breaking and was readily available elsewhere had the Truthers taken the time to search for it. It's only now that the Truthers are slapping lipstick on an old pig and calling it new and "troubling".
Huh?
"Third, the examination should include a review of other high-rise fires involving structural steel erected at a time similar to the WTC structures to determine if similar spherules were reported."
"What do you suggest, going back in time to collect samples?"
"You still are a funny guy, Sully..." No, I suggest conducting a review of scientific papers that may have analyzed dust generated during and after a fire of the type I described.
And I'd like to have 10 million dollars. What do you think are the chances of finding another paper similar to that of Jones et al.? Slim, I would say. And that's precisely why you'd suggest it.
"Fourth, the examination should also include the review of existing and non-impacted, structural steel high-rises to determine if residual dusts from the initial construction are the source of such spherules."
"ROTFLMAO! For that matter, how do we know that aliens from outer space didn't put the subject metal specimens there? Whoever came up with the talking points you're using is apparently getting rather desperate."
Anyone who's worked construction or demolition can testify to the abundance of dust and other "things" that become part of the structure once walls, floors and ceilings are installed.
Common sense alone suggests this dust as a plausible during a building's construction, but I see, Harry, that common sense isn't your strong suit.
Common sense may not be my stong suit, but that's hardly a handicap when arguing with a consummate moron like you, Tommy. Let's see how many spherical particles of substances melting at almost 5000 F we find in the dust at your house.
Active brazing, weldng, and cutting occured at the WTC when it was being built, so this dust is a probable source also.
That likely wouldn't account for the microscopic spherical particles, nor the wide variety of high temperature exposed substances.
"Yo, Goober, what they found was: "the presence of lead oxide on the surface of mineral wool", which means the lead had to have been volatilized, oxidized and then condensed on the mineral wool. Does your car burn lead and mineral wool?"
Traffic dust is just one probable source of lead.
We're not talking about lead. We're talking about vaporized, oxidized lead.
Another source are the printed circuit boards (PCBs) that contained tin-lead (Zn-Pb) solder and were present in almost every office space within the towers. The omnipresence of this matterial, along with the postulated temperatures and extensive presence of mineral wool as spray-on fireproofing, could have resulted in what the paper reported.
LOL! Sorry chumpy but "vapor phase soldering" does not involve the vaporization of lead. It is a method of soldering whereby the parts to be soldered are heated by subjecting them to the heated vapor of in inert liquid.
Nice try, though.
by
Harold Smith (0 articles, 3 quicklinks, 2 diaries, 532 comments)
on Thursday, January 31, 2008 at 5:00:37 PM
“Firstly, USGS did conduct a thorough investigation years before the publication of this recent paper. Results similar to what these researchers reported were reported then.”
Except, a FOIA request was needed to release some of this data, so, no, results were not conclusively reported then.
“Second, what's needed is a more extensive examination of the data (USGS, others, and these) and not yet another investigation”
That’s an opinion you are certainly entitled to, but only your opinion. And not much different from a new investigation, really.
As far as points 3, 4, 5, and 6…
The temperatures needed to form the spherules are not determined by other fire events, lead-paint, or traffic patterns, especially that of molybdenum and aluminosilicates.
Looks like a kettle of red herring to me.
by
Stephen Demetriou (6 articles, 0 quicklinks, 2 diaries, 181 comments)
on Thursday, January 31, 2008 at 12:29:18 PM
First because you came up with some wacky theory, then attempted to make it into fact by referencing several disjointed facts and false information you garnered through a website and bad assumptions.
Second, because you never bothered to actually read the book, only a 15 page excerpt from a 532 page novel. from this, you and teh ilk like you have WRONGLY ASSUMED that the story deals with the tit for tat arguments that seem to consume the 9/11 Truth Movement. The story, which takes place in 2011-2012, does not deal with these references! It doesn't discuss steel melting levels or no planes or LIHOP vs MIHOP. It is a a cautionary tale in that it says, unless we do something NOW, here's what happens!
It seems that every person who attacks the novel has one thing in common - THEY NEVER READ IT! I have a-holes leaving me e-mails and phone messages arguing some point about NIST, etc...but they NEVER READ THE BOOK! Conversely, those in the movement who have read it are a) impressed b) call it a page-turner c) see the value to the movement as a whole in that it INFORMS THE UNINFORMED MASSES.
Last, you try to create a relationship between the Mormons and 9/11 by bridging the gap with Cedarfort Books. Yes, they do market primarily to the LDS market...so what? That had ZERO to do with them taking on The SHELL GAME. In fact, TSG is NOT being marketed o the LDS stores. Every other detail is also wrong, from my relationship with them to my advance money (it was $20k not $50k). in essence, without any real research or even by asking the source (I would have told you if you asked) you made a dozen statements of fact based upon reading a website.
Brilliant.
Now let me challenge you! READ THE BOOK and post a real review! You may see the world differently.
--S. Alten
by
steve alten (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 5 comments)
on Thursday, January 31, 2008 at 1:01:22 PM
"First because you came up with some wacky theory, then attempted to make it into fact by referencing several disjointed facts and false information you garnered through a website and bad assumptions."
You DO realize, I hope, that I've used the same thinking to define the 9/11 Truth Movement - strange how that works. Either this thinking can be used by both sides (NIST vs. 9/11 Truth) or it can't be used by any. I'll presume you'll want the former because the latter would invalid your work and that of the 9/11 Truthers you've spoken highly of in interviews.
I'll take you up on your challenge. I'm going to B&N tonight to pick up Elizabeth Moon's (science fiction) new paperback release and will check to see if they have a copy of "The Shell Game". Given it's inherent dichotomy of mixing fiction with non-fiction, I'll provide reviews on the following:
(1) its basis as a fictional thriller, which includes character development, plot flow, and the dynamics between the two that should "thrill"; and
(2) its basis as a work that prompts the reader to research further the disturbing events of 9/11 and what they mean for America's future.
I follow through on my promises, Mr. Alten, as many a poster before you should know by now. But I challenge you to be open to my reviews and accepting of its results be they good, bad, or a mix of both. Where I'm promising to accept your challenge, I'm challenging you to not dismiss my reviews as being "mental" or "not worthy of discussion" and accept them as the opinion of a reader of your work. I think this quid pro quo is only logical and equitable due to the controversial nature of the subject matter.
by
Tom Murphy (3 articles, 4 quicklinks, 13 diaries, 1792 comments)
on Thursday, January 31, 2008 at 1:29:14 PM
Must Read (
Well Said (
News (
Touching (
Funny (
Supported (
Interesting (
Inspiring (
Valuable (
