Why I reject Word of Faith as false

tbeachhead

Well-known member
Exactly.

You also specifically said parable vs allegory. And as far as this quoted statement, I already answered that: the mountain he spoke of was allegory.
No. You're gaslighting again. You said "allegory"...then in another post you said "parable or allegory"...

And you're deliberately missing my point: We disagree. That's all. Jesus said tree and meant tree, because he did it to tree, and implied clearly "This is nothing compared to what anyone with like faith can DO." Not allegory. Not parable. Not "fig tree represents Israel," as unbelieving commentaries have suggested.

He killed a plant; he didn't move a mountain.
He wasn't irritated with a mountain...and he said, "This is nothing compared to what anyone with this faith can do!. Verily verily...." Do you know what "verily" means?

Which shows the inconsistencies of the bible stories. You should do this type of study on the resurrection. There are different stories that could NOT possible be all true (they contradict each other) in Matthew, Mark, Luke, John, Acts and 1 Corinthians. By the way, your Roman soldiers that somehow proves the resurrection, these Roman soldiers sent to seal the tomb and guard it ONLY show up in Matthew's account. They are absent in Mark, Luke, John and Acts. And Paul never mentions them.
Your point?

Why do you have to paraphrase scripture to make your point? Is your point not actually IN scripture? Not only did Jesus NOT say what you imply here, but Jesus words do not leave open this interpretation.
Did you miss it. Jesus said, "I'm telling you the truth..." then he goes on to say mountain.

Why do you insist that, in fact, He is lying, and did not mean mountain or tree? (Need a match for the gas?)

Because if "someone had ever" then they would be pointed to as special.
Not if it were never written down. If John had written everything Jesus had done, there would not be enough room for the books to contain it...Miracles don't happen to prove points. They happen in times of need. They might even get written down, so that you can call it "coincidence."

And in 1 Cor 13 NOBODY moved a mountain. Paul is speaking, as Jesus did, in allegory.
Nope...He's proving that you can have faith without it being saving faith.

The principles of faith are clear. Words impact molecules.

Yes, and let's not forget the blind man that Jesus couldn't even heal on the first try. Jesus never spoke to him about a lack of faith, never taught him to have more. No, Jesus just tried a second time and it worked that time.
And? The rain did not come at Elijah's first prayer either...It took seven times.

There's a principle of perseverance and not losing heart that Jesus taught with a widow.

Well, you already said that Jesus did NOT heal because someone needed healing (pool of Bethesda).
Huh? I said Jesus did NOT heal to PROVE anything. He healed only those who needed healing, and that because He had compassion. He could do no miracles in Nazareth because of a universal unbelief.

Jesus told us why he healed: it was so that the works of God could be displayed through them; it was for the glory of God.
The works of God is compassion...through healing. Same reason he fed 5000. Same principle...They were hungry, this time.
 

BlessedAnomaly

Active member
420 minutes...and the latter announced fifteen minutes before the building was pulled, on BBC, Internationally viewed...with the building as the backdrop to the shoot. The building was pulled.

You see? Proof doesn't prove anything to the willingly credulous.
No, conspiracy theories don't make an impact on me too often. Now, the fact that the earth is hollow and that's where the aliens are coming from. BOOM!

Without getting planted, entirely impossible. As was the passport they happened to find in the woods in PA.
What else did they find in these sites? How did paper fall from the WTC towers after the impact. OMG!! They should have burned up!!! Oh my brain tells me that paper burns! You're reaching for straws, Pete.

What came out the other side was an aluminum nose cone that showed no damage and went back into the flames...You need to watch it again with someone who's good at CGI and editing. There are expert videos out there that show how easy it is to fake.
What did I do for a living, Pete? Just wondering. Did it have anything to do with computers? Did it have anything to do with animation? Did it have anything to do with computer graphics? In these modern times, did it have anything to do with creation of mixed reality holographic displays?

What you need to do is to quit looking at doctored films form conspiracy theorists. Here is an image from one of twelve films that show the impact to the second tower. In many of them you can see the nose thrown from the explosion and burn up. You can see it here in the lower right corner.

1634884692454.png

When the space shuttle Challenger exploded, we see the explosion and two solid rocket boosters fly haphazardly away from the main explosion. But where is the main rocket? Where is the body of the shuttle? Pete, in an explosion of rocket fuel -- or jet fuel -- things get vaporized. The heat produced from such fuel is enormous.

In the WTC second tower the nose is ejected, burning. It vaporizes as it descends. There is not one film that does not come from conspiracy theorists video shops that shows a nose cone that goes back into the building. That is ludicrous and is an affront to all the families that lost loved ones in those buildings.

Bob...stop...just stop.

For a building to collapse straight down at free fall, you have to engineer near simultaneous catastrophic failure at ever level. Read up before posting farming material. WTC 7 was clocked at free fall. The twins were so near free fall as to be undeniably engineered.
I won't stop. You don't know what the hell you are talking about. Jet fuel will melt the steel in buildings given either enough fuel (as in the first two towers) or given enough time (as in WTC7). Quit with the conspiracy theories.

Free fall, Bob. Free fall...Near simultaneous catastrophic failure at every level.
Implosion, Pete. The structure was compromised and the building fell as designed for a demolition.

Great...I'm no expert...and I've been reading everything since that day.
You've been reading conspiracy theorists and dismissing the experts. It doesn't bother me as much that you would dismiss government officials. But the people who examined the why's of the collapses are professionals from outside the government. For this to be a conspiracy you would have to get dozens of companies in on it. This is simply ludicrous to even contemplate.

Nano pyrite is not used in the construction of a skyscraper...and I've found no one to make that claim. The "fact checkers" point to the elasticity of steal at elevated temperatures to explain total catastrophic failure on every level of the building. They do not explain molten steal that burned for ninety days...the last articles I just read claim the steal stayed molten because there were cars in the garage with gasoline...combined with smoldering office furniture...that could not be extinguished. Popular Mechanics published some of the most hilarious "conspiracy debunking" theory I've read so far.
You need to quit focusing on conspiracy theories, Pete.

And there is no evidence he had anything to do with it. (He wasn't big on working with Saudi Arabia...was he?)
Osama bin Laden was Saudi. But do you think that terrorists from Saudi Arabia somehow work for or with the government there? Some of them lived here in the US for more than a year taking flying lessons and otherwise learning the aviation system here. Bin Laden claimed responsibility immediately after the attack. He commented in video later that he did not think the buildings would collapse. He gave credit to Allah for that. The terrorist who hijacked the planes were al Qaeda and were known to be in cell groups related to bin Laden.

Not without help...not at free fall.
From heat and melting steel. The collapse points gave way. All three towers fell in the manner a demolition would.

This is getting tedious, notwithstanding the fascination I have from your responses...I'm feeling like I'm back to my Cogito Ergo Sum days in College Philosophy.
I feel I'm back to listening to people in reports who claim they were abducted by aliens. THis is complete nonsense for anyone to still believe.

What do you believe, Bob...and what satisfies your standard for "proof?" Can you give me an idea? How do you know that there was ever any history before you took your first breath? Do you believe there was a George Washington, for instance? Let's start there.
When I read Mark Twain I do not suddenly believe that Huckleberry Finn actually lived.

When I watched Independence Day, I didn't suddenly know that our history contained an alien spaceship hovering over the White House and blowing it to smithereens.

When I read about the Revolutionary War, I can see in many versions that it has consistency. When I'm told by trusted historians that the events really occurred, I lend my trust to them.

When I read about George Washington chopping down a cherry tree and I'm told by historians that it never happened, I don't run around crying foul and building a case for conspiracies.

When the flat earth people publish books and magazines about the earth being flat, I can look at empirical data and images from space to confirm that it is actually round(ish).

When a movie called Capricorn One, starring a man who would one day be accused of murdering his ex-wife, claims that we never went to the moon, I laugh and laugh and laugh -- because we have data that says that we have been there. In fact, my son's girlfriend's last name is Shepard and she knows who her uncle is and where he's been.

And when people deny the facts of the case of the WTC attacks it pisses me off considerably because I have a connection to it. Perhaps I did not personally know the people, but they worked in the company that I worked for and I talked with people who I worked with who did know them. It is quite personal to me.
 

BlessedAnomaly

Active member
No. You're gaslighting again. You said "allegory"...then in another post you said "parable or allegory"...
You really make me wonder if you know what the term "gaslighting" means. You use it like you found a new ten-cent word to throw around.

From Medical News Today:
Gaslighting is a form of psychological abuse where a person or group makes someone question their sanity, perception of reality, or memories. People experiencing gaslighting often feel confused, anxious, and unable to trust themselves.​

Pete, do you really feel psychologically abused by me? Do you question your sanity when you talk with me? Your perception of reality? Are you confused (don't answer that!), anxious and unable to trust yourself because of interaction with me?

Somehow I doubt it. So how about quitting the drama.

And you're deliberately missing my point: We disagree. That's all. Jesus said tree and meant tree, because he did it to tree, and implied clearly "This is nothing compared to what anyone with like faith can DO." Not allegory. Not parable. Not "fig tree represents Israel," as unbelieving commentaries have suggested.
And no mountain ever moved. He was speaking of "great faith." Yes, we disagree.

He wasn't irritated with a mountain...and he said, "This is nothing compared to what anyone with this faith can do!. Verily verily...." Do you know what "verily" means?
No it had nothing to do with a physical mountain and more to do with issues in a person's way, he was telling them: "For this reason I tell you, whatever you pray and ask for, believe that you have received it, and it will be yours." He wasn't telling them to go shuffle mountains around. He was telling them, once again, to fear not. You can have what you need if you ask in faith.

Your point?
And your avoidance of any point?

Did you miss it. Jesus said, "I'm telling you the truth..." then he goes on to say mountain.
I'm telling the truth: pray, ask for what you want, believing, and you shall have it. The mountain is a metaphor for big things. The overall picture, an allegory to teach meaning.

Why do you insist that, in fact, He is lying, and did not mean mountain or tree? (Need a match for the gas?)
Who said he was lying? Straw much? (Does your image of matches make you anxious and begin to question your own sanity?)

Not if it were never written down. If John had written everything Jesus had done, there would not be enough room for the books to contain it...Miracles don't happen to prove points. They happen in times of need. They might even get written down, so that you can call it "coincidence."
Cute. If we were talking only about each and every miracle Jesus performed you would be making your point. We're not. We are talking about all of church history and looking for a mountain that moved. It isn't there.

Nope...He's proving that you can have faith without it being saving faith.

The principles of faith are clear. Words impact molecules.
As a myopic statement about faith, yes -- I agree. Try to tie that to the ongoing discussion and you become pedantic.

And? The rain did not come at Elijah's first prayer either...It took seven times.

There's a principle of perseverance and not losing heart that Jesus taught with a widow.
And none of these are Jesus God. Elijah wanted something but it was not God's will to offer it for the first six times. Jesus told us that he and the Father were one, they thought alike and he never did anything unless it was from the Father. Elijah and the widow couldn't say the same.

Huh? I said Jesus did NOT heal to PROVE anything. He healed only those who needed healing, and that because He had compassion. He could do no miracles in Nazareth because of a universal unbelief.
Yes, that second full sentence. That is what I said -- perhaps choppy. All in all, this quote is one I agree with.

The works of God is compassion...through healing. Same reason he fed 5000. Same principle...They were hungry, this time.
The works of God is to fulfill his Word. He could care less about your healing, which is why there is disease in the world in the first place. He put it here. He says so in many places, like Exo 4:11 and Isa 45:7. When God heals he does it for his purposes. When you ask for healing you may get it, you may not. I pray that you are fortunate enough to always be on the receiving side of God's gracious healing.

Jesus, as a man, had much compassion for the people that he came to teach, for the people that he came to save. But even Jesus did not walk around healing everyone who was sick and diseased. No, he did what his Father's desired.
 

tbeachhead

Well-known member
You really make me wonder if you know what the term "gaslighting" means. You use it like you found a new ten-cent word to throw around.

From Medical News Today:
Gaslighting is a form of psychological abuse where a person or group makes someone question their sanity, perception of reality, or memories. People experiencing gaslighting often feel confused, anxious, and unable to trust themselves.​

Pete, do you really feel psychologically abused by me? Do you question your sanity when you talk with me? Your perception of reality? Are you confused (don't answer that!), anxious and unable to trust yourself because of interaction with me?

Somehow I doubt it. So how about quitting the drama.
Bob...Are you even serious?

Are you seriously asking me to question my sanity...or my perception of reality...or even my knowledge of the dictionary definition of what you're doing? It's because you do things like this that I even use the term. This is a wasted tactic on me, and ridiculous at the onset. Folks who recognize gaslighting are able to call the one attempting to distort the conversation, and restore sanity to it.
And no mountain ever moved. He was speaking of "great faith." Yes, we disagree.
After literally killing a literal tree...


No it had nothing to do with a physical mountain and more to do with issues in a person's way, he was telling them: "For this reason I tell you, whatever you pray and ask for, believe that you have received it, and it will be yours." He wasn't telling them to go shuffle mountains around. He was telling them, once again, to fear not. You can have what you need if you ask in faith.
No one is claiming this was a command to "shuffle mountains." This was a door, and Jesus opened it up so that no protestation of yours can shut it.
And your avoidance of any point?


I'm telling the truth: pray, ask for what you want, believing, and you shall have it. The mountain is a metaphor for big things. The overall picture, an allegory to teach meaning.
The tree was no metaphor. The mountain was an expansion on the mere tree. No metaphor, but this explains how you've limited yourself.
Who said he was lying? Straw much? (Does your image of matches make you anxious and begin to question your own sanity?)
Does your sarcasm give you a sense of control? The metaphor is not "truly truly I tell you." It's more like "Sort of kind of like maybe...but definitely not truly..."

Cute. If we were talking only about each and every miracle Jesus performed you would be making your point. We're not. We are talking about all of church history and looking for a mountain that moved. It isn't there.
It is there. You called it "myth." It was Marco Polo's testimony. If another example were out there, you would still call it myth or coincidence...and then insist that It has never happened.


As a myopic statement about faith, yes -- I agree. Try to tie that to the ongoing discussion and you become pedantic.
Huh?


And none of these are Jesus God. Elijah wanted something but it was not God's will to offer it for the first six times. Jesus told us that he and the Father were one, they thought alike and he never did anything unless it was from the Father. Elijah and the widow couldn't say the same.
Notwithstanding, Jesus operated under the same principles of faith as He walked as we do...the meaning of Mark 11 is clear.


Yes, that second full sentence. That is what I said -- perhaps choppy. All in all, this quote is one I agree with.
Great to hear. If we don't have the kind of faith that grows over time, the roots of the sycamore are firmly fixed and unthreatened.


The works of God is to fulfill his Word. He could care less about your healing, which is why there is disease in the world in the first place.
If this sentence is true, "compassion" is meaningless. Jesus wept when Lazarus died, and still raised him from the dead.

"How I have longed to take you into my arms, as a hen does its chicks...but YOU WOULD NOT."

He put it here. He says so in many places, like Exo 4:11 and Isa 45:7. When God heals he does it for his purposes. When you ask for healing you may get it, you may not. I pray that you are fortunate enough to always be on the receiving side of God's gracious healing.
Elijah might have got the rain. He might not have...he prayed until he got it...

Hebrews eleven they prayed until they died, never doubting...so that we pray always and do not lose heart.

As I see it, until I'm a general, I fight like a corporal...not to give my life for my country, but so the poor dumb bastard of the enemy's army give his life to his country...Patton paraphrased.

I do not have to know everything but I have to act on. what I know.
Jesus, as a man, had much compassion for the people that he came to teach, for the people that he came to save. But even Jesus did not walk around healing everyone who was sick and diseased. No, he did what his Father's desired.
He healed every single one who came to him. That's what I work with.
 
Last edited:

Rachel Redux

Active member
No, conspiracy theories don't make an impact on me too often. Now, the fact that the earth is hollow and that's where the aliens are coming from. BOOM!


What else did they find in these sites? How did paper fall from the WTC towers after the impact. OMG!! They should have burned up!!! Oh my brain tells me that paper burns! You're reaching for straws, Pete.


What did I do for a living, Pete? Just wondering. Did it have anything to do with computers? Did it have anything to do with animation? Did it have anything to do with computer graphics? In these modern times, did it have anything to do with creation of mixed reality holographic displays?

What you need to do is to quit looking at doctored films form conspiracy theorists. Here is an image from one of twelve films that show the impact to the second tower. In many of them you can see the nose thrown from the explosion and burn up. You can see it here in the lower right corner.

View attachment 2105

When the space shuttle Challenger exploded, we see the explosion and two solid rocket boosters fly haphazardly away from the main explosion. But where is the main rocket? Where is the body of the shuttle? Pete, in an explosion of rocket fuel -- or jet fuel -- things get vaporized. The heat produced from such fuel is enormous.

In the WTC second tower the nose is ejected, burning. It vaporizes as it descends. There is not one film that does not come from conspiracy theorists video shops that shows a nose cone that goes back into the building. That is ludicrous and is an affront to all the families that lost loved ones in those buildings.


I won't stop. You don't know what the hell you are talking about. Jet fuel will melt the steel in buildings given either enough fuel (as in the first two towers) or given enough time (as in WTC7). Quit with the conspiracy theories.


Implosion, Pete. The structure was compromised and the building fell as designed for a demolition.


You've been reading conspiracy theorists and dismissing the experts. It doesn't bother me as much that you would dismiss government officials. But the people who examined the why's of the collapses are professionals from outside the government. For this to be a conspiracy you would have to get dozens of companies in on it. This is simply ludicrous to even contemplate.


You need to quit focusing on conspiracy theories, Pete.


Osama bin Laden was Saudi. But do you think that terrorists from Saudi Arabia somehow work for or with the government there? Some of them lived here in the US for more than a year taking flying lessons and otherwise learning the aviation system here. Bin Laden claimed responsibility immediately after the attack. He commented in video later that he did not think the buildings would collapse. He gave credit to Allah for that. The terrorist who hijacked the planes were al Qaeda and were known to be in cell groups related to bin Laden.


From heat and melting steel. The collapse points gave way. All three towers fell in the manner a demolition would.


I feel I'm back to listening to people in reports who claim they were abducted by aliens. THis is complete nonsense for anyone to still believe.


When I read Mark Twain I do not suddenly believe that Huckleberry Finn actually lived.

When I watched Independence Day, I didn't suddenly know that our history contained an alien spaceship hovering over the White House and blowing it to smithereens.

When I read about the Revolutionary War, I can see in many versions that it has consistency. When I'm told by trusted historians that the events really occurred, I lend my trust to them.

When I read about George Washington chopping down a cherry tree and I'm told by historians that it never happened, I don't run around crying foul and building a case for conspiracies.

When the flat earth people publish books and magazines about the earth being flat, I can look at empirical data and images from space to confirm that it is actually round(ish).

When a movie called Capricorn One, starring a man who would one day be accused of murdering his ex-wife, claims that we never went to the moon, I laugh and laugh and laugh -- because we have data that says that we have been there. In fact, my son's girlfriend's last name is Shepard and she knows who her uncle is and where he's been.

And when people deny the facts of the case of the WTC attacks it pisses me off considerably because I have a connection to it. Perhaps I did not personally know the people, but they worked in the company that I worked for and I talked with people who I worked with who did know them. It is quite personal to me.
You may have a "connection" to the WTC but are you a physicist? Steven Jones is and he knows that the WTC was brought down with bombs.
 

Attachments

  • epn2016474p21 (2).pdf
    597 KB · Views: 6

BlessedAnomaly

Active member
Bob...Are you even serious?

Are you seriously asking me to question my sanity...or my perception of reality...or even my knowledge of the dictionary definition of what you're doing?
Why can't you read? Nowhere have I asked you to question your sanity. Nowhere have I asked you to question your perception of reality. But, yes, I did question your knowledge of the dictionary definition of gaslighting.

The definition of gaslighting carries with it an ABUSE of a person in an attempt to make them ANXIOUS and UNABLE TO TRUST THEMSELVES.

Go to ANY dictionary definition and your will find these terms. So if you do know the dictionary definition then you are claiming that I am psychologically abusing you to get you to question your sanity.

If this is not true then STOP using the wrong word.

It's because you do things like this that I even use the term.
You are misusing the term, whatever your motives.

This is a wasted tactic on me, and ridiculous at the onset.
I'm simply quoting the dictionary and medical meaning of the word. Prove me wrong.

Folks who recognize gaslighting are able to call the one attempting to distort the conversation, and restore sanity to it.
Gaslighting is not about some "sanity" of the conversation. It is a psychological attempt to get a PERSON to question THEIR own sanity.

After literally killing a literal tree...
Bunny trail on the gaslight definition subject.

No one is claiming this was a command to "shuffle mountains."
You did. Right here--
The fact that this act was so random convinces me that he meant both mountain and tree...

This was a door, and Jesus opened it up so that no protestation of yours can shut it.
Jesus told us the power of faith. Not telling us to go move literal mountains, but that no problem will be too difficult for us. If God is with us, who can be against us.

The tree was no metaphor.
No one claimed it was.

The mountain was an expansion on the mere tree.
The mountain was a metaphor -- no mountain has ever been moved.

No metaphor, but this explains how you've limited yourself.
Metaphor. And this explains your hermeneutic and why you believe conspiracy theories.

Does your sarcasm give you a sense of control? The metaphor is not "truly truly I tell you." It's more like "Sort of kind of like maybe...but definitely not truly..."
What metaphor do you ascribe to in saying this?

It is there. You called it "myth." It was Marco Polo's testimony. If another example were out there, you would still call it myth or coincidence...and then insist that It has never happened.
Marco Polo brought back the stories of the far east. He was telling of the mythologies that he found.

Huh?

Notwithstanding, Jesus operated under the same principles of faith as He walked as we do...the meaning of Mark 11 is clear.
Jesus taught us faith. Let's see you raise a dead body as he did with Lazarus. Go put the ear back on a man who has had it severed. Go rub mud on the eyes of a man blind from birth and make him see.

You cannot.

These were events to show that he was the Messiah. And he told us through these events that we can do great things too. But until you do the things that are mentioned above, you are a dreamer. If you say that they are real and you can do them, then you have NO faith. Which one is it, Pete?

Great to hear. If we don't have the kind of faith that grows over time, the roots of the sycamore are firmly fixed and unthreatened.
God will move through whomever he desires. If he chooses to use you, he will. You, on the other hand, will not go out and pull up the sycamore, metaphor or physical, on your own because you think you have some God given ability or faith. It will ONLY happen if God is using you for his current move.

Still no mountain moved. Trees are still firmly planted in the ground.

If this sentence is true, "compassion" is meaningless. Jesus wept when Lazarus died, and still raised him from the dead.
No, compassion is when God desires to show compassion. You said it: Jesus did not heal all who were present and sick; he healed the one. Jesus stayed away from Lazarus for four days. Where's the compassion as his sisters cried and mourned; and when Jesus finally arrived they cried out "Where were you?? Our brother is dead and gone!!" His compassion came when God decided to show compassion. For those whom God decides not to show compassion, well, I guess we have Hebrews 11:latter.

"How I have longed to take you into my arms, as a hen does its chicks...but YOU WOULD NOT."
One size fits all, huh? This meets EVERY situation? How shallow.

Elijah might have got the rain. He might not have...he prayed until he got it...
I prayed until I.....

Sometimes the rain doesn't come. Then we run to Hebrews 11:latter and claim scripture always works.

In the end, God defines "good." And we will not always like his definition, but it will meet his plan.

Hebrews eleven they prayed until they died, never doubting...so that we pray always and do not lose heart.
See.

As I see it, until I'm a general, I fight like a corporal...not to give my life for my country, but so the poor dumb bastard of the enemy's army give his life to his country...Patton paraphrased.
This is non-sequitur -- or if not non-sequitur, it proves my point a heck of a lot better than yours. But it is good, nonetheless.

I do not have to know everything but I have to act on. what I know.
Said the man who ran out the door, not knowing that this particular side of the house was unfinished, and he fell to his death off the cliff.
1635013363443.png

He healed every single one who came to him. That's what I work with.
Yeah.
Paul had a thorn and healing was refused.
Timothy had stomach problems and healing was refused; instead he was told to drink wine.
Trophimus in Miletus was left sick by Paul, even through he prayed for healing.

And let's not forget his hometown where he tried and was amazed that he could not heal, except but a few. So NOT every single one who came to him. Perhaps he tried, but the sycamore in that town remains rooted.
 

BlessedAnomaly

Active member
You may have a "connection" to the WTC but are you a physicist? Steven Jones is and he knows that the WTC was brought down with bombs.
Yes, I'm aware of Steven Jones. But one man (or many) does not decide the truth. Others have read and written about his theories as well.

Jones presented his theories in 2005. In 2006, Brigham Young University placed him on paid leave because of them. Shortly thereafter, he and the university agreed it would be best for BYU if he retired.

Jones claimed that the paper was peer reviewed, which met with much rebuke. Long story short, the reviewers showed up as references in other of Jones' works and speaking engagements. It appears there was a "good-ole boy" network going on to push the theories.

In 2009, Jones et. al., published another 9/11 paper in The Open Chemical Physics Journal. "The editor of the journal, Marie-Paule Pileni, an expert in explosives and nano-technology, resigned." The article was published without her authorization. Later, the magazine fell into ill-repute as a technical journal for its handling of peer reviewing of articles, including one that was published after being written by an AI program and never peer reviewed.

As for Jones' paper on a technical level---
 

Rachel Redux

Active member
Yes, I'm aware of Steven Jones. But one man (or many) does not decide the truth. Others have read and written about his theories as well.

Jones presented his theories in 2005. In 2006, Brigham Young University placed him on paid leave because of them. Shortly thereafter, he and the university agreed it would be best for BYU if he retired.

Jones claimed that the paper was peer reviewed, which met with much rebuke. Long story short, the reviewers showed up as references in other of Jones' works and speaking engagements. It appears there was a "good-ole boy" network going on to push the theories.

In 2009, Jones et. al., published another 9/11 paper in The Open Chemical Physics Journal. "The editor of the journal, Marie-Paule Pileni, an expert in explosives and nano-technology, resigned." The article was published without her authorization. Later, the magazine fell into ill-repute as a technical journal for its handling of peer reviewing of articles, including one that was published after being written by an AI program and never peer reviewed.

As for Jones' paper on a technical level---
Did you even read the 2016 Europhysics article?
 

BlessedAnomaly

Active member
Did you even read the 2016 Europhysics article?
Said article -- NOT peer reviewed -- is written by Steven Jones, who has already been disproved. This article, likewise, was rejected.

 

Rachel Redux

Active member
Said article -- NOT peer reviewed -- is written by Steven Jones, who has already been disproved. This article, likewise, was rejected.

Who fact-checks snopes?
Obviously l believe Jones and I trust the gut instincts I've had about 9/11 since I woke up to the news on September 11th in Phoenix.
Peer review equals good ol' boy network, equals "I don't wanna go against the flow and lose MY job!!"
 

BlessedAnomaly

Active member
Who fact-checks snopes?
Obviously l believe Jones and I trust the gut instincts I've had about 9/11 since I woke up to the news on September 11th in Phoenix.
Peer review equals good ol' boy network, equals "I don't wanna go against the flow and lose MY job!!"
Well, we all get to accept or reject based on our own criteria and the data we chose to make decisions with. Good luck with yours.

As for me, I'm almost done with my book exposing Bigfoot having caused the Princess Diana crash to protect the information that the moon landing was faked, so that nobody could find out that the dark side of the moon is occupied by the aliens that crash landed at Roswell. But it was found out that Diana got her information to Prince Andrew who delivered it to Jeffery Epstein, who in turn blackmailed Bill Clinton into wearing a blue dress for a picture. We all know what happened there when Hillary found out. She sent Bigfoot back into hiding.😉
 

Rachel Redux

Active member
Well, we all get to accept or reject based on our own criteria and the data we chose to make decisions with. Good luck with yours.

As for me, I'm almost done with my book exposing Bigfoot having caused the Princess Diana crash to protect the information that the moon landing was faked, so that nobody could find out that the dark side of the moon is occupied by the aliens that crash landed at Roswell. But it was found out that Diana got her information to Prince Andrew who delivered it to Jeffery Epstein, who in turn blackmailed Bill Clinton into wearing a blue dress for a picture. We all know what happened there when Hillary found out. She sent Bigfoot back into hiding.😉
You go, dude!
P.S. Don't forget to do a chapter on the Bermuda Triangle being a time portal!
 
Last edited:

BlessedAnomaly

Active member
Here is as good a place as any, since I just got done talking about aliens.

The head of NASA looks like he could be Kenneth's brother :oops:


Untitled-1.jpg
 
Top