From: post2wm@gmx.de
Date: 2011-04-15 15:24:55
I agree, it’s a sad reflection of the low “state of the art”. And even the big protagonists like Alex Jones can be accused of moving from topic to topic, releasing emotions and turning away to the next embarrasment before and instead of forming actions and persisting on reaching results. A difficulty I see may also be that journalism is increasingly dependent on scientifc qualification and the scientist are more and more bound by being contracted to commercial interests. So we need more independent scientists with unconditional funding. My idea is a scientific ethos where every scientist should be open to serve as an expert towards questions from the public regularly and for free with this being documented and being a measure for a kind of scientific impact factor. His reputation inside the scientific communiy should depend on his freely given expertise and this expertise will be available to anyone being able to demonstate reasonable public interest. The internet is the perfect way to organize such a system. Everybody could have an expert at hand if his own qualification would be questioned.The system should be such that an expert giving wrong testimony would ruin his scientific reputation in a big way for a long time. Wolfgang At 15:40 15.04.2011, you wrote: Sadly, this is too little too late. We’ve written press releases over the years – and all have been ignored. The focus on WTC 7 lessens the change of seeing the true picture – which involves advanced free energy and weather control technology. I’ve been posting this information to this group for about 3 years – so this is kind “a level behind” so to speak…. Sorry… but it is the truth…. Are you interested in what’s really going on in the world, behind the facade? Then… www.checktheevidence… What happened on 9/11? www.drjudywood.com/
