Since said "journal" is currently putting out new articles at the blazing rate of about 1 every 10 months, I think one thread to cover all that is new will suffice.
The latest paper is a legal opionion:
The Cause of the Destruction of the World Trade Center and the Admissibility of Expert Testimony by Stevan D. Looney [must resist obvious snark], March 2015
From the abstract:
I have not read the article as I have next to no tools at my disposals to parse and judge a legal opinion. Perhaps LashL, JayUtah, Loss Leader and others with apparently some law background want to dive into this?
On the author: He signed the AE911T petition approximately around the turn of year 2010/11. From his profile:
So he must have been an active truther since at least early 2006, when the Wayback-Machine first archived v911t.org* .
He is one of 37 lawyers listed at the Sutin Law Firm in Albuquerque:
http://ift.tt/1wR80qZ
He sports a J.D. (1980) from the University of San Francisco and is between 60 and 64 years old.
* For giggles, visit v911t.org today :D The website-account was first suspended in February 2012, then re-released in Dec 2013 with a new layout, and disappeared again a year later.
The latest paper is a legal opionion:
The Cause of the Destruction of the World Trade Center and the Admissibility of Expert Testimony by Stevan D. Looney [must resist obvious snark], March 2015
From the abstract:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Looney Under the standards established by the United States Supreme Court in Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceutical, Inc., 509 U.S. 579, 113 S. Ct. 2786, 125 L. Ed 2d 469 (1993) and its progeny, expert testimony offered to support the official theory and hypotheses concerning the cause of the destruction of World Trade Center Buildings 1, 2 and 7 (the WTC) on September 11, 2001 would probably be excluded from admission into evidence by an impartial judge in a civil or criminal proceeding. In contrast, expert testimony presenting an alternative theory and hypotheses explaining the cause(s) of the destruction of the WTC grounded in and adhering to accepted and reliable scientific principles using the scientific method would satisfy the Daubert test and would be admitted into evidence. |
I have not read the article as I have next to no tools at my disposals to parse and judge a legal opinion. Perhaps LashL, JayUtah, Loss Leader and others with apparently some law background want to dive into this?
On the author: He signed the AE911T petition approximately around the turn of year 2010/11. From his profile:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Looney at AE911T Degree: JD Biography: I am a trial lawyer with over 30 years of litigation experience. I am one of the earlier members of Scholars for 911 Truth and Oath Keepers. I am also a cofounder of Veterans for 911 Truth www.v911t.org. I wrote the mission statement for v911t and conceived the idea to display the flag with the union down. Personal Statement: It is obvious to any conscious thinking person who takes even a few hours to evaluate the available evidence, or even simply watch the video of WTC 1, 2 and 7, that these buildings were felled with explosives. WTC 1 and 2 were pulverized into dust. WTC 7 was felled in a more traditional manner into its footprint. |
So he must have been an active truther since at least early 2006, when the Wayback-Machine first archived v911t.org* .
He is one of 37 lawyers listed at the Sutin Law Firm in Albuquerque:
http://ift.tt/1wR80qZ
He sports a J.D. (1980) from the University of San Francisco and is between 60 and 64 years old.
* For giggles, visit v911t.org today :D The website-account was first suspended in February 2012, then re-released in Dec 2013 with a new layout, and disappeared again a year later.
via International Skeptics Forum http://ift.tt/1BVEz7z
Aucun commentaire:
Enregistrer un commentaire