My Conversation with Prof. Jim Fetzer

[uke2se]

As for WTC7, there are some partial videos and photos that show smoke billowing out of the side. Where there is smoke, there is fire. Also, many, many accounts by firefighters confirm this.

Ergo knows all his after having been told many times before. What you're seeing is just denial.

 

[Sword_Of_Truth]

an idiot this man is not.

He's a space beamer. Even among your kind, he's an idiot.

 

[ergo]

As for WTC7, there are some partial videos and photos that show smoke billowing out of the side. Where there is smoke, there is fire. Also, many, many accounts by firefighters confirm this.

So in other words, no? You don't have images of the south side of WTC 7 in full flames? You don't have videos of the south view of WTC 7 as it's collapsing? Why do attribute this to truther "trickery"? Do you think truthers have somehow managed to restrict all these images from public view?

Where there is smoke, there is smouldering.

 

[SezMe]

ETA: I did not find it hard to follow.

Neither did I.

The first part where he asks about academic e-mail leaves me wondering if he thinks Brass may be a spy of some sort.

I wasn't troubled his asking for an academic address. Brass said he was a student so having an academic address would be expected and a convenient way to verify the position of the correspondent. He didn't have to suspect a spy to be somewhat cautious. I'll bet long-time profs get a lot of goofy e-mail that is just not worth responding to.

 

[tsig]

Several points stand out to me as significant.

Fetzer seems like a Truther and not a professor
By this I mean more than just his factual information and the rhetoric of his statements. The interesting thing to me is that Fetzer would continue with a correspondence that he clearly finds beneath him. He's not just frustrated with someone who doesn't understand what he's saying. He seems to see this whole discussion as beneath him, yet continues writing to Brass. It reminds me very much of the kind of Truthers we see here on JREF and that I have met elsewhere. They will never stop repeating their Truther mantras over and over and over again, even to those who have lost interest in hearing. He threatens to stop the correspondence, but doesn't.

Honestly, I had not expected Fetzer to be so obviously like a Truther.

He shows phony Truther suspicion
The first part where he asks about academic e-mail leaves me wondering if he thinks Brass may be a spy of some sort. He uses words like 'shill' to describe Mark Roberts. Apparently he believes there are Kennedy assassination investigators who have 'disappeared'. I guess he believes the NWO super secret government sends around spies dressed up as students to find out what super important info has has on them.

This leaves me thinking that, like a lot of other educated Truthers you see here and elsewhere, he is frustrated that no one will listen to him. Fetzer is a professor and used to being listened to just because of that. He seems to find it very frustrating that people laugh at him and treat him like a joke. I suspect he feels he should be listened to no matter what he says. Or rather, that what he says is the measure of what should be listened to. What you see here is the result of years and years of being ostracized professionally and being treated like a joke by large numbers of students.

Anyway, those are my initial thoughts on this.

He's suffering from Phd syndrome, that's where you think you've learned so much that you know everything and are an expert in every field and all others should accept your word as the unvarnished truth.

 

[Scott Sommers]

He's suffering from Phd syndrome, that's where you think you've learned so much that you know everything and are an expert in every field and all others should accept your word as the unvarnished truth.

I get that feeling from this. He would be the laughing stock of any university department - and he would know it. He would be the lightening rod for those weird students that you always wonder how they got in. And given my understanding of who is involved in this 9/11 Truth type stuff, a lot of them would be Christians of some sort. He apparently has written a book about "the Christian Right's crusade against science" while at same time champions a position that would have widespread appeal among Ron Paul libertarians. So he wouldn't even be surrounded by the kind of students that he wants.

Some of these 9/11 professors strike me as people who made a decision early on based on limited data and a lot of ideology, but because they've made these statements in public, find it disturbing to move away from it. How can a 70-year-old James Fetzer, who has publicly supported Judy Wood, now back away from this? It would be classic case of the cognitive dissonance among Truthers that some here have speculated about.

 

[uke2se]

I get that feeling from this. He would be the laughing stock of any university department - and he would know it. He would be the lightening rod for those weird students that you always wonder how they got in. And given my understanding of who is involved in this 9/11 Truth type stuff, a lot of them would be Christians of some sort. He apparently has written a book about "the Christian Right's crusade against science" while at same time champions a position that would have widespread appeal among Ron Paul libertarians. So he wouldn't even be surrounded by the kind of students that he wants.

Some of these 9/11 professors strike me as people who made a decision early on based on limited data and a lot of ideology, but because they've made these statements in public, find it disturbing to move away from it. How can a 70-year-old James Fetzer, who has publicly supported Judy Wood, now back away from this? It would be classic case of the cognitive dissonance among Truthers that some here have speculated about.

I think you're being too kind to the old man. Uncle Fetzer has dabbled in holocaust denial, let's not forget.

 

[Scott Sommers]

I think you're being too kind to the old man. Uncle Fetzer has dabbled in holocaust denial, let's not forget.

Honestly, I wonder if he isn't mentally ill. But because of the life style that academia provides, he's able to appear quite functional. I am no expert these matters, but there are several of these 9/11 professor-types that strike me as - in the more colloquial term - crazy. Fetzer, Wood, Hall, and some others, all leave me thinking their 9/11 beliefs are the result of some serious break with reality.

But that's just a feeling I have.

 

[Sword_Of_Truth]

So in other words, no? You don't have images of the south side of WTC 7 in full flames?

Because it's standard procedure that when firefighters are pulled, photographers and civilians with cameras are always left behind, right?

RIGHT?

We have the photos of the massive gobs of smoke and the testimonies of the most experienced fire observers in the world as to what caused the smoke.

That's more than enough for us and you.

Where there is smoke, there is smouldering.

Wrong...

Wrong...

Wrong...

Wrong...

WRONG!

Feeling embarrassed and humiliated yet?

 

[000063]

I am going to put this as kindly as I can. One day when you grow up and
discover that we were right and you were wrong, you are going to feel very
differently about all of this.

Brass, I think you may have accidentally emailed my mother.

 

[000063]

I don't care. It's a fact.

ANYBODY who thinks that controlled demo took down the towers is a retarded, drooling idiot.
...

Now now. They could just be ill-informed, and biased. Of course, if they spend years on the subject and still hold that opinion, that still leaves bias.

Stupidity is always an option, though.

 

[ergo]

He's suffering from Phd syndrome, that's where you think you've learned so much that you know everything and are an expert in every field and all others should accept your word as the unvarnished truth.

Pot, meet kettle.

But unlike certain self-styled "debunkers" we know, Fetzer actually has a PhD. And he's had one since 1970; my guess is he's used to it by now. He doesn't need to wave it in front of people.

Honestly, only a 9/11 bedunker would find something objectionable about an advanced degree.

 

[ergo]

Feeling embarrassed and humiliated yet?

Not really. Maybe you should post larger pictures...

 

[minnemouse]

First of all, thanks for posting this very interesting conversation, Brass.

And secondly; you may have been rude, but only after several insults from Fetzer. And you were a lot more patient than most folks would be, Brass

What I dont get, is the need for this Fetzer to be so rude; If he is so sure of his case, he could easily debate it without resorting to insults. Its like any other discussion or quarrel; when you are fresh out of arguments, and you know you have lost, you resort to insults. ("you" as in anyone). We`ve all seen it on forums where "truthers" frequent.

So what I get from the discussion between you and Fetzer: When "truthers" has lost the discussion; insult, lie, distort and avoid. That is the ONLY way the "truthers" know how to debate.

 

[slowsmile]

Fetzer comes across just like a lot of the "truthers" on the Icke Forum.

He's "gone down the rabbit hole" and doesn't realise he's dug through into the rats nest, still less that there is sky, grass and air up above in the big world outside.

 

[leftysergeant]

I do not rule out the possibility that the bloaty old toad hit himself too hard over the head with a bottle.

 

[Childlike Empress]

I think you're being too kind to the old man. Uncle Fetzer has dabbled in holocaust denial, let's not forget.

That's news to me. Evidence?

 

[Childlike Empress]

I did read the information that Fetzer passed on to me, thank you very much.

You should have done that before you approached him. Not defending his later rudeness, but he's completely right in objecting to your generic "conspiracy theorists say this and that" questions when he himself has published extensively on the topic. You simply didn't meet the standards of academic discussion (both sides are informed about the topic at hand, here Fetzer's stand on 9/11), were insulting his intelligence and wasting his time.

 

[000063]

Pot, meet kettle.

But unlike certain self-styled "debunkers" we know, Fetzer actually has a PhD. And he's had one since 1970; my guess is he's used to it by now. He doesn't need to wave it in front of people.

Honestly, only a 9/11 bedunker would find something objectionable about an advanced degree.

It might as well be a PhD in dance, for all the good it does him.

Funny how truthers will mock everyone else for believing in government studies as blind parrots, but will cling to the slightest hint of credibility of their own "experts".

 

[Oystein]

You should have done that before you approached him. Not defending his later rudeness, but he's completely right in objecting to your generic "conspiracy theorists say this and that" questions when he himself has published extensively on the topic. You simply didn't meet the standards of academic discussion (both sides are informed about the topic at hand, here Fetzer's stand on 9/11), were insulting his intelligence and wasting his time.

In a rare case of agreement with CE, I had the same impression when I read (I haven't quite managed to prevail against my tl;dr instinct yet, so I should say: part of) that exchange.

That said, Fetzer is still a misguided baffoon and whackjob and quite far out on the loony side And too rude too quickly with Brass I guess that went both ways; both parties didn't work particularly hard to avoid escalation and remain civil.

I guess Brass' main tactical mistake was to try to debate Fetzer, when his objective should have been to get a clear, concise version of what one prominent figure of trutherdom claims with regard to the topic of his class paper. He should not have argued against the information Fetzer wanted to convey and instead tried to make sure he reports it faithfully as one side of the issue.