Thursday, January 17, 2019

The Raw Deal With Jim Fetzer 2019.01.17


James Henry Fetzer (born December 6, 1940) is a philosopher of science and conspiracy theorist. Since the late 1970s, Fetzer has worked on assessing and clarifying the forms and foundations of scientific explanation, probability in science, philosophy of mind, and philosophy of cognitive science, especially artificial intelligence and computer science.

Today: Guest, Joe Olson

JamesFetzer.org
The Real Deal Archives
Revolution.Radio





64k CF Download

11 comments:

jerry said...

Re: Fetzer and his Lenny Posner lawsuit. Something very strange about this ... Posner supposedly sued Halbig and then dropped it when he was required to show up in court, yet he turns around and sues Fetzer for the same thing? What reputable law firm would take this 2nd suit seriously? Yet one has. Sound incredible? It does, unless Fetzer has been set up in a clever trick by Posner ie., Posner doesn't drop this one. And if Fetzer thinks we live in a country with fair trials, I'd suggest he read https://freeross.org as well as https://freeschaeffer.com ... not to mention the Bundy Ranch travesty, Waco or Ruby Ridge. Jim may be happy now, but he may not be so jubilant when faced with a totally corrupt "judge". Ross Ulbricht was sentenced to two life terms + 40 years for operating a website called The Silk Road. Apparently there are no sentencing guidelines when dealing with a corrupt or insane "judge"!

Panzerfaust said...

I'm listening to this now.

By far Dr. Fetzer and Mr. Olsen are head and shoulders above the likes of Andrew Gage, Judy Woods, and the like with their absurd nanothermite and DEW misdirection ploys. Without a doubt Israeli nukes were responsible for the carnage and mass murder for endless war aided and abetted by traitors in the US govt and private sector.

I wish I had known this was going to be tbe topic for while I agree with the nuclear demolition premise the exact method outlined by Mr. Olsen of "basement nukes only" remains wanting. A pulse of energy from the bottom upwards sufficiently capable of destroying the tower's immense core would have blown straight through the roofs. Review slow motion video and it's evident the top floors were undercut first then blown apart and that process continued down to street level, ejecting debris horizontally. The "squib" locations correspond with hot gasses travelling downward, reaching a passenger elevator solid floor (WTC towers were essentially stacked multistory buildings) and shooting out through the path of least resistance.

The volume and distances of horizonally ejected debris (including firefighters blown blocks away) and the multiple explosions heard together with that massive section of top floors disintegrating away from the center column as it fell points to a daisy chain sequential detonation of multiple nuclear charges.

Unknown said...

I agree with panz, a shock wave travelling up the building would have blown out the windows from the ground up - didn't happen. The shock wave would also travel along the ground and do serious damage to the surface.

Panzerfaust said...

In video you can see the helicopter approach the South Tower to initiate the top-down demolition sequence.

As far as holograms that too is incompatible with video footage as the various amature and network shots vary too greatly to be capturing the same image in real time. The "aurcrafts" morph in one while not in another, losing a wing and such. In some the "planes" are black, in others grey, and so forth. Plus Jim's assertion that twin jumbo jets parallelled the hologram would require they exceed sea level structural integrity speeds.

I am not trying to be unkind here but, as is the case with Fetzer's JFK shot throught the neck theory, they are so wanting of credibility I have to ask if this is yet another layer of disinfo? How the hell does a structural engineer watch the WTC Tower demolition and come to tbe conclusion it was achieved by "nuke lasers" from the bottom up?

GTFO!!!

Panzerfaust said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Panzerfaust said...

Anyone with an aviation background knows the sound of high-bypass turbofan.
https://www.britannica.com/technology/high-bypass-turbofan

Sample 767 high speed pass, note the high pitch whine:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mtdpQMkGubc

Compare to sound captured in this video (also note pyrotechnics shooting out of blown out floors, the CIA, Mossad people, FEMA folks, etc)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2dLb0qpKtXw

That roaring shreak is a rocket or cruise missile.

Joseph Olson said...

Dr Fetzer and I covered a tiny fraction of my + thousand hours of research on WTC vaporization and two hours was not inclusive of all Truth. One objective was to narrow the scope of the Robert David Steele memo to the most reliable evidence. I did state both Twin Towers had multiple secondary explosions. There were planted thermite charges on exterior box columns with diagonal cut lines to shed walls into the footprint.

Nuclear bombs and artillery shells cannot be stored in a nuclear event area without risk of unintended detonation. This prevented deposit W-54 nuclear bazooka shells.

"Nuclear Weapons Employment Doctrine, FM 101-31-1" > Feb 1968

Panzerfaust said...

Motivated by personal loss too have been researching thus subject for a decade or more, collecting and reviewing half a terabyte of information over that time period. At this point in time through the years of discovering one lie after another being forwarded by credentialed "experts" I have grown unimpressed by such.

Quote:

"Shielding. Finally, if the source is too intensive and time or distance do not provide sufficient radiation protection, the shielding must be used. Radiation shielding usually consist of barriers of lead, concrete or water."

https://www.nuclear-power.net/nuclear-power/reactor-physics/atomic-nuclear-physics/radiation/shielding-of-ionizing-radiation/shielding-gamma-radiation/

Have you even bothered to explore the concrete shielding properties of the floors and the possibility of lead shielding? The military tactical waehead reference is an inapplicable red herring simply because the means of delivery precludes the weight of lead shielding.

Joseph Olson said...

@panzerfaust

you appear to be an anonymous troll, state your real name and qualifications, I DID.

as for "hearing" incoming, if there was only hologram it would have been difficult to project 767 sound....with a missile, you would have sound and platform to add sound....you could also have transponder to fix ATC radar....

as to Nukes > Wiki/Neutron_bomb

nuclear vaporization is the ONLY WTC explanation

Panzerfaust said...

Sir,

Your obstensively refuse to address the issues I provided aside from cherrypicking and answering AGAIN with a red herring: the audio may be tampeted with. Fine. Why overlay a non-airliner engiine sound? That makes no sense at all.

Again, how in the hell would a basement nuke alone shooting some kind of nuke laser up through the towers not blow the roof off, and how would it account for the top-down destruction, including horizontal debris ejection blocks away? The energy from the basement would go UP not OUT.

I am not doubting nuclear demolition, as your statement implies. I AM questioning this ridiculous nuke laser theory. If you're so confident then reply to my questions instead of atrempting to discredit the questioner.

The questions are fowarded in good faith.

Panzerfaust said...

Additionally, as Unknown stated, a basement "nuke laser" device (as opposed to a nuke detonation foundry, which all evidence points to) would influence the bottom floors as well as the top with the same or more destructive potential, blowing out the first floor windows.

Perhaps there is a logical explanation. Let's hear it.