Architects and Engineers Against AE911Truth

A fairly common criticism of Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth is its quoting of the number of signers of its petition. For example I recently watched a video in which the narrator (I'm paraphrasing) said, 'At first sight the numbers look impressive, 2000+ architects and engineers, but when you compare that number to the actual number of registered architects and engineers it doesn't look so impressive.'



And I found this statement at http://ift.tt/1iGOVjC

Quote:

Only a handful of architects and engineers question the NIST Report, but they have never come up with an alternative. Although at first blush it may seem impressive that these people don't believe the NIST Report, remember that there are 123,000 members of ASCE(American Society of Civil Engineers) who do not question the NIST Report. There are also 80,000 members of AIA(American Institute of Architects) who do not question the NIST Report. Although their field of expertise is not related to the construction of buildings - they don't seem to have a problem with that over at AE911truth - there are also 120,000 members of ASME(American Society of Mechanical Engineers) who do not question the NIST report. There are also 370,000 members of IEEE(Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers) who do not question the NIST report. There are also 40,000 members of AIChE(American Institute of Chemical Engineers) who do not question the NIST Report. There are also 35,000 members of AIAA (American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics) who do not question the NIST report. So who would you rather believe?

And this from Paolo Attivissimo:

Quote:

...A classic Dunning-Kruger effect. In your opinion, experts are blind but the less competent have 20/20 vision. Does it not seem strange to you that all the real experts in the field disagree with the "controlled demolition" theories? Consider the options: a) all the world's structural engineers are incompetent, wrong or corrupt and you an a bunch of non-experts are right b) you are wrong and the world's structural engineers are right Ask yourself which of these scenarios is more plausible. Have a nice day.

Bolding is mine.



The problem with this thinking is that we are talking about two groups: signers of the AE911Truth petition and an 'other group'. But this 'other group', namely all the registered architects and engineers who have not signed the petition at AE911Truth, is simply assumed to have the following characteristics:



1. Knowledge of the objections to the official account of 9/11 made by A&E For 9/11 Truth

2. Interest in the events of 9/11 to the degree that they have formulated rigorous refutations to those objections



But that is only an assumption – it has not been shown to be the case. It is not a given that if you are an engineer or an architect then you are automatically aware of the challenges to the official account of 9/11. How do we know that all these people don't question the NIST report in the sense that they have read it and don't see any problem with it? They might not have read it. They might not know that anyone is challenging it.



I would like to know how many registered architects and engineers would be prepared to sign a petition making an active statement of opposition to the claims made by A&E For 9/11 Truth.



I propose setting up a sticky thread called something like,



JREF Architects and Engineers Against A&E9/11 Truth Petition



And to have a sort of form to fill in, something along the lines of:

Quote:

Name: Qualifications: Reason for Signing Petition: I have read and understood all the claims made by AE911Truth.org and I do not accept them as evidence for the idea that the twin towers or building 7 were brought down using controlled demolition.

What do you think?

via JREF Forum http://ift.tt/1gfXf22