-----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: brin-l@mccmedia.com Sent: Mon, 25 Sep 2006 2:46 PM Subject: RE: 9/11 conspiracies (WAS RE: What should we believe when there is no reliable information?)
> Dan Minette <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Behalf Of Nick Arnett > > Assuming that a large number of people can't be > wrong about something > > because they are smart and well-connected is a > tautology. > > I think that you are still missing the point, so let > me try it again. Let > me start with one example: Gautam's dad. He's a > structural engineer. I > think it is fair to say that one of the first > instincts that a technical > person like him or myself when faced with something > like this is trying to > understand it. In particular, when one's own area > of expertise is involved, > using that expertise to understand is all but > instinctive. <snip> I have absolutely no experience in structural engineering, so have not comented on this thread, but I'm just going to toss out one medical example of well-educated folk in the field being wrong: _Helicobactor pylori_ infection and relation to peptic ulcer disease. One researcher (from Australia, IIRC) posited and studied this; the vast majority of gastroenterologists disagreed completely -- until it was finally shown to be true. Took years. My personal experience has been that my 'medical gut feelings' are correct better than 90% of the time, even when specialists' opinions do not concur. My gut about this administration is that it spins 'truth' like a top, and is utterly untrustworthy. About the towers, I really don't know; about cabals within our government manufacturing crises: Gulf of Tonkin(g?). But this is a different situation. The discovery that ulcers were caused by helicobactor was a typical breakthough in medicine and science where previously held beliefs are found to be incorrect and an old theory is replaced by a new and better theory (think Einstein and Newton). The point being made in this case is not that there is faulty science but that the facts that exist cannot be explained with the theory that the buildings that were brought down by a the planes. People with both knowledge and experience in such matters see no significant inconsistencies and as far as I can tell those that exist are of the type that are always present in complex real life circumstances. Those arguing against the planes did it theory are not arguing that there are features of structural engineering theory are incorrect thus explaining the conspiracy they are arguing that the structural engineers are incorrect in the standard use of their theories and knowledge. ________________________________________________________________________ Check out the new AOL. Most comprehensive set of free safety and security tools, free access to millions of high-quality videos from across the web, free AOL Mail and more. _______________________________________________ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
