14-08-2013, 03:51 PM
I can't answer with any specificity who Tom is. I believe he is a physicist and has created a web site which is or was a resource for all sorts of information about the WTC.
http://www.sharpprintinginc.com/911/
The JREF people think of him as a truther. The truth guys such as Tony seem to think of him as a OCT guy. I find his insights instructive.
When I left AE911T I began to feel free and try to find the answers that AE refused to provide. My questions seemed to cast me as a threat. That was bizarre. Dwain Deets, a fellow board member who supported my and eventually resigned and left AE at least partially because of how they treated me... remains a truther and a friend of sort. I know he's explored all sorts of answers... such as nukes and we've discussed it. I like and respect him. He's mostly involved in aviation issues I believe and I have nothing to add on that so I say nothing.
I do and I don't understand the anonymity thing. Sometimes it might embarrass someone if their friends and colleagues knew that they were so heavily involved in 9/11 regardless of their position. I spend time on net discussions and so forth in proportion to my other time demands. All of my output - the many slides... some of which I have posted here were produced mostly in the period from 09-13. I arrived at a ROOSD conclusion for the collapse phase and termed it a vertical avalanche in email discussions before I found 911FF and became aware of Tom's ROOSD acronym. Ozeco41 had arrived at a similar conclusion on his own. Both of us and others decided to accept the ROOSD acronym. It's handy and who cares who named it? I think it explains the collapse phase and why THOSE designs came down as they did. Lemkin doesn't agree. Bully Bully for him. I don't care. Apparently neither does Phil. Both believe what they want to... see what they to and seem set. It hardly matters. I am not trying to convince anyone... more like expose what I have learned... which may be wrong. Every needs to use the tools they can to solve the mysteries they see.
9/11 is a very complex technical and political and psychological puzzle. Event the debates about it reveal something about people and how they think.
http://www.sharpprintinginc.com/911/
The JREF people think of him as a truther. The truth guys such as Tony seem to think of him as a OCT guy. I find his insights instructive.
When I left AE911T I began to feel free and try to find the answers that AE refused to provide. My questions seemed to cast me as a threat. That was bizarre. Dwain Deets, a fellow board member who supported my and eventually resigned and left AE at least partially because of how they treated me... remains a truther and a friend of sort. I know he's explored all sorts of answers... such as nukes and we've discussed it. I like and respect him. He's mostly involved in aviation issues I believe and I have nothing to add on that so I say nothing.
I do and I don't understand the anonymity thing. Sometimes it might embarrass someone if their friends and colleagues knew that they were so heavily involved in 9/11 regardless of their position. I spend time on net discussions and so forth in proportion to my other time demands. All of my output - the many slides... some of which I have posted here were produced mostly in the period from 09-13. I arrived at a ROOSD conclusion for the collapse phase and termed it a vertical avalanche in email discussions before I found 911FF and became aware of Tom's ROOSD acronym. Ozeco41 had arrived at a similar conclusion on his own. Both of us and others decided to accept the ROOSD acronym. It's handy and who cares who named it? I think it explains the collapse phase and why THOSE designs came down as they did. Lemkin doesn't agree. Bully Bully for him. I don't care. Apparently neither does Phil. Both believe what they want to... see what they to and seem set. It hardly matters. I am not trying to convince anyone... more like expose what I have learned... which may be wrong. Every needs to use the tools they can to solve the mysteries they see.
9/11 is a very complex technical and political and psychological puzzle. Event the debates about it reveal something about people and how they think.