04-06-2013, 01:21 AM
The concept of the delphi approach to establish the facts is nonsense. And especially so when one considers who are those voting on the value of the evidence - the panel. The very notion that one can vote on what is a fact or not is absurd on the face.
And then one needs to look at who is actually sitting on the panel voting. In almost all cases the panel members have already biased and stated positions about what happened on 9/11 such as the recently announced new member Jonathan Cole, a member of AE911T, a former board member of AE911T and someone who has been producing content for the 911 truth side for more than 5 years. How could Jonathan Cole possibly be objective?
Look at the members of this panel:
http://www.consensus911.org/panel-members/
These are the church leaders telling the choir that they are being objective and god is real.
This is the sort of effort which undermines credibility... and makes many people around the world see this as a side show in a three ring circus.
Objectively it looks more as if this is meant to discredit the real need to establish the facts.
And then one needs to look at who is actually sitting on the panel voting. In almost all cases the panel members have already biased and stated positions about what happened on 9/11 such as the recently announced new member Jonathan Cole, a member of AE911T, a former board member of AE911T and someone who has been producing content for the 911 truth side for more than 5 years. How could Jonathan Cole possibly be objective?
Look at the members of this panel:
http://www.consensus911.org/panel-members/
These are the church leaders telling the choir that they are being objective and god is real.
This is the sort of effort which undermines credibility... and makes many people around the world see this as a side show in a three ring circus.
Objectively it looks more as if this is meant to discredit the real need to establish the facts.