My Conversation with Prof. Jim Fetzer

[carlitos]

Several points stand out to me as significant.

Fetzer seems like a Truther and not a professor

I was thinking the same thing as I read that. Wow. A couple of real gems there. I think the first one could win a stundie. Of all the things a demolition can be, only the truthy people use the term "classic."

WTC-7 was taken down using a
classic controlled demolition. The towers by a demolition under control.

But it was not a classic controlled demolition, for reasons that I explain in
all my presentations.

And, of course "argumentum ad youtubum." This is what qualifies as an argument, from a teacher of critical thinking?

See "This is an orange" on YouTube.

 

[leftysergeant]

You would expect a former artillery officer to have noticed the lack of sounds of HE detonations, unless he were suffering the early stages of some sort of dementia.

 

[beachnut]

wikipedia:




You can call him insane or a shill or whatever, an idiot this man is not. And he doesn't suffer idiots lightly.

Idiots are too smart for Fetzer to understand. Fetzer has won no debates on 911.

He is insane on JFK, 911 and more. He is not an idiot. Idiots are orders of magnitude more sane than our super nut Fetzer. Fetzer is DEW nuts, JFK obsessed, and for him, what he says is true. That is the Fetzer way, he says it, it is truth.

He is a cleaned up intellectually insane version of CIT. Wiki must of left out his insanity.

 

[ergo]

To address some of the more inane comments in this thread regarding the "role of educators", when random people who are students at another institution contact them for information and then argue with them when the information is, in good faith, provided:

BRASS (the OP) IS NOT A STUDENT OF FETZER'S. Fetzer owes no duty of "education" to ANYONE who is not a registered student of his, let alone some young punk who contacts him via e-mail just to argue.

The posters who suggest otherwise are obviously not teachers or instructors themselves, or they would never make such a ridiculous suggestion. Fetzer owes Brass NOTHING. He was being polite. It was Brass who began the rudeness.

Stupid thread.

 

[trustbutverify]

*marks day in calender red*

He was on my "shill list" for quite some time until I more or less abandoned that list because I turned out to be wrong about other people on it. I heard him say very silly things and consider him, in agreement with many "truthers", to be trouble. No idea what's going on inside his head, but an idiot he is certainly not. If you haven't seen it, check the hardfire episode with him and Gravy. He clearly "won", from a rhetorical point of view.

You're kidding, right?

 

[ergo]

Actually, there is video of the south side, in full flame, recorded from a side view here:

And this is a stupid video. At what time stamp is this view of the south side in full flame? Now I'm the one being polite with you, because we know there is no such view.

Time wasters.

 

[Brass]

To address some of the more inane comments in this thread regarding the "role of educators", when random people who are students at another institution contact them for information and then argue with them when the information is, in good faith, provided:

BRASS (the OP) IS NOT A STUDENT OF FETZER'S. Fetzer owes no duty of "education" to ANYONE who is not a registered student of his, let alone some young punk who contacts him via e-mail just to argue.

The posters who suggest otherwise are obviously not teachers or instructors themselves, or they would never make such a ridiculous suggestion. Fetzer owes Brass NOTHING. He was being polite. It was Brass who began the rudeness.

Stupid thread.

If you're going to tell me BS, I'm going to call you out on it. That is my M.O. with everybody and some guy with a PhD is no exception.

I'm also offended by your comments of "young punk". You don't know me and have no right to call me that. Show me where I was a "punk" or "rude". Because he said things with no backing? Was I supposed to take those at face value like some sort of 9/11 truther?

BTW, it's also a "stupid thread" that you've contributed greatly to.

 

[ergo]

I don't have the knowledge that Fetzer has on the subject, but if I had some young kid, obviously quite new to the topic, contacting me for information regarding "my side" of the debate, and in the very first response, rejects the first resource I offer, then begins to lecture me about the buildings' design: "To understand this structural failure, it's important to understand the structure of the WTC...etc..." -- points that I not only would already know, but would undoubtedly have known longer than this dude, well, I wouldn't have been nearly so patient as Fetzer.

If you can't see why your behaviour was insolent and disingenuous, then you're not going to be interested in anything else I have to say about this exchange.

Fetzer was polite with you right up to and including his response to your e-mail a year later, after you hadn't sent him the paper you promised. The information you were providing was from stale, bedunker talking points that have been dealt with ad nauseum.

If you had been really interested in presenting what truthers see as the problems with the official story, you would have done honest, thorough research and only contacted Fetzer if you had questions that needed clarification. You got into this exchange because you wanted to argue, plain and simple.

 

[uke2se]

If you're going to tell me BS, I'm going to call you out on it. That is my M.O. with everybody and some guy with a PhD is no exception.

I'm also offended by your comments of "young punk". You don't know me and have no right to call me that. Show me where I was a "punk" or "rude". Because he said things with no backing? Was I supposed to take those at face value like some sort of 9/11 truther?

BTW, it's also a "stupid thread" that you've contributed greatly to.

Ergo is trolling like most twoofers on this forum. It's probably best to just ignore him.

 

[alienentity]

Alright. In a thread in this subforum entitled "Gravy sites violates Google's TOS??", the conversation derailed a little bit (yes, mostly in part by me) to the rhetoric and name-calling that the 9/11 Truth Movement has bestowed upon some of us more logical thinkers. I posted some of the statements and names that Jim Fetzer addressed me as in an exchange of e-mails. ,,,,

Annnnnnd, scene.

Loved every minute of it, Brass. Interesting that you decided to debate a few things with Fetzer, and I see he is basically a moonbat with an excellent vocabulary. Sure, he's confident, but also overly aggressive and transparently wrong - ie a blowhard.
But that does make him entertaining!

I can tell from your exchange that you aren't fooled by any of the nonsense that 9/11 Truthers routinely present. I share the dismay and irritation that people could actually take the Silverstein, Mineta and Jennings statements in such an erroneous fashion, but one can't help but expect more from a professor like Fetzer. He is ultimately a disappointing man, demonstrating that even smart people can believe really dumb things.

Keep up the good work and drop by my channel to see some of my videos. if you haven't already seen my Jennings video you can find it here.

Cheers

AE

 

[alienentity]

As someone who has done extensive graduate work in the field of developmental psych (I approach human development and cognition as a developmental constructivist), I believe I am qualified to discuss matters related to my field. However, I also believe my advanced degrees in said field do not give me the credentials to speak as an expert on the collapses of WTC 1, 2 & 7, the science of controlled demolitions, etc.

The same holds true for Mr Fetzer. ...

What follows in the exchanges a year later is nothing more than a typical truther vs debunker debate with the appropriate jabs and personal insults to which I have nothing to add.

Yup..

btw welcome to the forums!

 

[Dash80]

Fetzer may be an educated, smart guy. It sure as hell doesn't stop him being an arrogant idiot though.

 

[fourtoe]

Fetzer supports the CD claims now? I thought he thought that beam weapons did it.

Brass, while I just slightly read the exchange, ask him to source this claim of his.

" UL certified the steel used in the buildings to 2,000*F for three or four hours."

Ask him which tests they used, and show that they did this.

I went round and round with him, and he never would answer, nor could he.

I even went so far as to contact UL, and they claimed they never did such a thing, nor would they. I also talked to some of the people I work with in the field, and they had never heard of UL certifying steel to such a degree. Now, SFRM, sure. However, nothing like that was certified for 3-4 hours. It's ALWAYS an exact time and temperature.

SFRM such as Blazeshield, with a 2" application, is 2000 deg. F for 4 hours IIRC.

Exact. Not an estimate, and not a range of time.

Fetzer did respond to this charge, it just was lame and dismissive:

There was a huge fire in the North Tower in 1975, where it burned intensely at 2,000*F for around four hours. None of the steel had to be replace, which is a nice indication that UL's certification was right on the money. There is some kind of quibble from people like Roberts, which seems to impress you. But the evidence supports that the steel was excellent--and perhaps you have overlooked that no steel-structure high rise ever collapsed from fire before or since.

UL didn't certify the steel, but it's apparently a quibble to point that out to someone who claims that they did.

I'm also offended by your comments of "young punk". You don't know me and have no right to call me that. Show me where I was a "punk" or "rude". Because he said things with no backing? Was I supposed to take those at face value like some sort of 9/11 truther?

Speaking on behave of all the punx, don't worry about being offended at all by that name usage from ergo.

I don't have the knowledge that Fetzer has on the subject...

...too easy.

I am pretty shocked by Fetzer's behavior. I knew he was crazy and a blowhard but I didn't think he was also a douchebag. When Comptus and I were searching for videos and recordings of 911 debates I recall Comptus saying he contacted Fetzer and he was very helpful and polite.

 

[Childlike Empress]

Fetzer was polite with you right up to and including his response to your e-mail a year later, after you hadn't sent him the paper you promised. The information you were providing was from stale, bedunker talking points that have been dealt with ad nauseum.

We also don't know the content of the draft paper he sent Fetzer after the year - curiously not the finished version, which he "lost".

Ergo is trolling like most twoofers on this forum. It's probably best to just ignore him.

I take it you can't back up your claim that Fetzer "dabbled in holocaust denial" then. No surprise there.

 

[fourtoe]

We also don't know the content of the draft paper he sent Fetzer after the year - curiously not the finished version, which he "lost".

Why would he fake losing his paper? What would be the motive behind sending an even crappier version of his paper to Fetzer? Furthermore, Brass doesn't say he lost it.

I take it you can't back up your claim that Fetzer "dabbled in holocaust denial" then. No surprise there.

Maybe he's referring to this? This is the first time I've heard of him being accused of HDism...Fetzer does have this article going for him, I guess.

 

[Childlike Empress]

Why would he fake losing his paper? What would be the motive behind sending an even crappier version of his paper to Fetzer? Furthermore, Brass doesn't say he lost it.

I was pointing out that we miss a piece of the puzzle to judge Fetzer's reaction. Possibly the draft contains a stream of the little derogatory terms duhbunkies D) are so fond of, which he cleaned up before submitting it into civilized society.

Maybe he's referring to this? This is the first time I've heard of him being accused of HDism...Fetzer does have this article going for him, I guess.

For him, indeed. It's just smearbot routine and swallowed without second thought by the usual suspects.

 

[Oystein]

...Maybe he's referring to this? This is the first time I've heard of him being accused of HDism...Fetzer does have this article going for him, I guess.

Going for him==

Others in the administration with dual citizenship include Paul Wolfowitz, Elliot Abrams, Richard Pearle, Douglas Feith, “Scooter” Libby, Eliot Cohen, and John Bolton. Do any of these names sound familiar?

That is a blatant lie. These men are Jews - they do not hold Israeli citizemnship. Fetzer refers to a website that admits to have lifted the names from yet another website. Fetzer apparently repeats it in this context because it fits his antisemitic worldview.

Even worse, a little later he llet's us know that his source of "facts" is David Irving, world-reknowned Holocaust denier:

Who runs this country? About two weeks after 9/11, Ariel Sharon said, “We own America, and the Americans know it”.

If you follow the link on "Arial Sharon", it will lead you to a web site called "Action Report online", which is "David Irving's daily newswatch" (small print on top of the homepage).

I think I can smell bedfellows here.

 

[Walter Ego]

The Company They Keep

Maybe he's referring to this? This is the first time I've heard of him being accused of HDism...Fetzer does have this article going for him, I guess.

Fetzer mentions my video "Truthers Defend Holocaust Denier" in the linked article.


Fetzer's position (as he clearly states in the video) is that the Truth Movement should not reject the 9/11 "research" of Holocaust deniers if it advances their cause.

At the “Accountability Conference” held in Chandler, AZ, February 2007, for example, the issue arose repeatedly during a press conference, parts of which are included in a 4:33 minute YouTube piece entitled, “Truthers Defend Holocaust Denier”, but none of us was defending Holocaust denial. Some of us, including me, were defending a scholar’s research on 9/11, even though he is very critical of Israel and may even be anti-Semitic, which is not the same thing. Suppose that is the case. If he were anti-Semitic, which I personally deplore, would that render his 9/11 research, which is principally focused on the physical destruction of the World Trade Center, of no value? Should it therefore be discounted, discarded, or ignored?

The "scholar" Fetzer is referring to is the notorious anti-Semite and Holocaust denier Eric Hufschmid.

 

[Brass]

Loved every minute of it, Brass. Interesting that you decided to debate a few things with Fetzer, and I see he is basically a moonbat with an excellent vocabulary. Sure, he's confident, but also overly aggressive and transparently wrong - ie a blowhard.
But that does make him entertaining!

I can tell from your exchange that you aren't fooled by any of the nonsense that 9/11 Truthers routinely present. I share the dismay and irritation that people could actually take the Silverstein, Mineta and Jennings statements in such an erroneous fashion, but one can't help but expect more from a professor like Fetzer. He is ultimately a disappointing man, demonstrating that even smart people can believe really dumb things.

Keep up the good work and drop by my channel to see some of my videos. if you haven't already seen my Jennings video you can find it here.

Cheers

AE

I've seen your videos and they are remarkable! Thanks for the kinds words, as well.

Maybe he's referring to this? This is the first time I've heard of him being accused of HDism...Fetzer does have this article going for him, I guess.

And this exchange, as well, basically saying he is undecided on the issue and that more "open discussion" should be done in regards to the Holocaust.

 

[uke2se]

Maybe he's referring to this? This is the first time I've heard of him being accused of HDism...Fetzer does have this article going for him, I guess.

I have CE on ignore as I won't abide his incessant trolling so I never saw any request for evidence of the well known fact that Fetzer has dabbled in holocaust denialism.

Here's Fetzer:

I am not a Holocaust denier (even though I'm inclined to believe the numbers killed have been exaggerated)

http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.php?showtopic=17658&view=findpost&p=225498

What Fetzer is "inclined to believe" is the core tenant of Holocaust Denial.