MIT - Morons In Training

Exclusive to
By Douglas Herman
I'm always amazed what simpletons some brainy folks are. Once we regular folks leave college for the real world, we realize college graduates with numerous awards and diplomas are only smarter by degrees but not necessarily wiser. And common sense is not all that common. And Men of Letters often have no practical experience--aside from reading letters from other men like themselves.
Applied Science versus Theoretical Science.
The average farmer working his field must calculate the gallons per hour his diesel tractor consumes. Applied science rather than theoretical science. If he tills a square mile of land, 640 acres, he realizes his tractor engine consumes more fuel at a higher RPM and the engine works harder but nor more efficiently, and so he sets his speed according. Applied science again when the farmer applies it in the field.
Recently, some British poll determined a linguistic professor at MIT - Massachusetts Institute of Technology - was the smartest intellectual in the world. Allegedly the guy has written a couple hundred books. This fellow was so deep, one of the "most cited" authorities in the world, that whatever he said entered the realm of fact.
Funny how an institution - Yale or MIT - can build a reputation for braininess but closer inspection indicates that lofty reputation is wholly undeserved. The average farmer tilling his land appears smarter by comparison. He applies his knowledge in the field, rather than simply positing theories that hold little merit when examined closely.
Now MIT, like Yale University, is a huge, government funded and privately supported, think tank. Sort of like the American Enterprise Institute (AEI) or AIPAC, a couple of institutes that allegedly foster friendly foreign relations but which any objective observer would be hard pressed to explain just how they benefit the average American taxpayer.
Likewise, Yale University: College of Criminal Arts, ranks among the most prestigious universities for brainy people but when you consider the yokels and hucksters and scalawags who have matriculated there"both Bush and Clinton clans as well as that doofus Kerry--any objective observer might deduce Yale's reputation for braininess was wholly undeserved.
Awhile back, a number of MIT brains, including that institute's top "intellectual" deduced that 911 was simply what the government claimed it was: An act of terrorism wholly perpetrated by fanatics from the Middle East. Indeed, that top intellectual authored a book of his brainy interviews on the subject entitled "9-11."
A hasty little compilation, the booklet hardly mentioned any of details of the attack. Instead, ignoring basic Core Evidence, "9-11" blamed American policies for the attack, but without mentioning the more intellectually challenging possibility: The attack was wholly or partially the brainchild of "intellectuals" much closer to home.
When Scientific Theory Conflicts With Facts, Physics & Logic
Immediately after 911, a number of structural engineers gathered at the government-funded institute of MIT and - surprise, surprise - affirmed the government version of events about 911. "The main culprits in bringing the famously lofty buildings down, they concluded, were the two intensely hot infernos," summarized Scientific American writer, Steve Ashley.
"The World Trade Center was never designed for the massive explosions nor the intense jet fuel fires that came next - a key design omission," according to Eduardo Kausel, M.I.T. professor of civil and environmental engineering and panel member. The towers collapsed, allegedly, after the kerosene jet fuel fire weakened high tensile steel.
These "scientific" conclusions then appeared in the Scientific American magazine: Science & Technology at Scientific American, "When the Twin Towers Fell".
Unfortunately, little of the structural steel in the WTC was examined, however, by the learned structural engineers. Beams and girders were instead shipped overseas for hasty recycling. Nor did any structural engineer comment on actual photos of the alleged "inferno." Might have been difficult for them to explain how a woman Walked Through Steel-Melting Fire.
A Show of Hands For Hard Science?
Now this MIT symposium, reminded me of a meeting of the Flat-Earth society, where believers hoisted their yardsticks above their heads and proclaimed they,d measured the surrounding countryside inch-by-inch and found it flat, thus the Earth was flat. The MIT structural engineers concluded their scientific symposium almost by a show of hands, or popular vote!
"Given the lack of firm conclusions regarding how the collapses occurred, (since all the evidence was conveniently destroyed) the M.I.T. panel participants asked their audience to consider various theories they put forth." In short, they admitted, after expending hours of hot air, that they didn,t know what-the-hell happened!
So instead of applying hard science, they applied theory. Since their government had hastily carted off all the factual, hard evidence that might have conflicted with "scientific" theory, they drew conclusions based on conjecture!
So, instead of building a forty-foot, scale model (1/25 scale) of the boxy skyscrapers,WTC-1, WTC-2. WTC-7, and shooting an aluminum scale model airplane into the upper floors of building 1 & 2 at 400 miles per hour, and setting fire to that section with a few gallons (more or less) of kerosene, they simply dissected the blueprints, inspected some computerized images of floor joints, hypothesized that "intensely hot infernos" caused joist connections to fail, and delivered their conclusions to the modern Flat Earth society at MIT via the pages of the Scientific American.
Morons In Training. Any metallurgist from a community college, with a modicum of field research and a curiosity about how things work, could construct a ten foot (1/100 scale) model of the WTC-7, set a few smoldering fires in the lower floors and film the results.
And absolutely nothing would happen! Not today, not tomorrow and not next year. Instead, that scale model of a 47-story, steel skyscraper, (WTC-7), that allegedly collapsed due to the "stress of intense heat" would remain as inflexible as the gray matter in the brains of those MIT scientists.
Unfortunately, our Morons In Training at MIT, which is only another government-funded think tank, feel no need to conduct honest, real world tests, since they do not live in the real world. They live in a world of illusions and government-funded, computer-generated propaganda. Pathetic.
Philosopher and skeptic, Douglas Herman authored the definitive philosophical-suspense novel, The Guns of Dallas and writes for Rense.
Jim Mortellaro
Which is the standard call of all college students these days. Let's begin with the first question, "So What?"
So what is the big deal here? Is this something which is new? College students, even the brains, have no experience. This is true of all college grads, Ph.D., MBA, M.O.U.S.E., Physics, whatever. It's the experience which makes them know everything. It's the experience which comes after exposure to the reality of practicing their trade, using their degree.
A college degree, no matter the size or shape, presents the basic knowledge base upon which a man or woman may learn from experience. Nothing new here. OK, OK, so I'll get to the point of others hanging on every word. Later. For the time being, let's discuss question number two.
Who Cares? Not me. You see, I've had to deal with many a degreed primadonna during my career. When I consulted for a firm recently, there was a very brilliant MBA assigned by the firm's owners and board of directors, to my client. He was cocky, he was arrogant and he was almost always wrong.
After a period of perhaps nine or so months, every decision I made, he countered. So, I resigned. The president of the firm called me back and told me I had full authority within the purview of my field, which was marketing. OK fine. The business more than doubled in less than two years. But did I make the "kid" as we called him, look bad? Hell no. I made the decisions, and I required that he, the kid, implement them.
He learned. I learned. The owners learned. Everyone was happy. I met the kid in court about seven years ago. We were both paid expert witnesses. I went on first. I waited with bated breath for the kid to counter every darned thing I said. I was both surprised and happy to hear him agree with everything to which I testified.
What's in it for me? Easy. That's the cry of the new college grad. When I graduated with a degree in EE and got my first job at Grumman in 1966, I was paid the then high salary of almost ten thousand dollars. Yikes. Today, the kids are paid minimum four times that if they're in the top ten percentile of their graduating class. Add a few more degrees and they will, with a Ph.D. in EE, pull down over a hundred thousand dollars in their first job.
Can you imagine what they'll be earning when this country goes to hell in a hand basket? Give us six or seven years and these kids will be making up to three and a half yards a *week!* A yard being a thousand dollars.
Now let us get back to the writer's main point. We give these kids credence. Well, that's quite so. But those who give these kids credence are *not* in the mainstream of practical application of the kids' expertise. They are likely in academia. Or they are in awe of those in academia.
What's the point? Well, hell's bell's it's right theren staring you in the face if you just look. Ooops! You will require the services of a mirror. I almost forgot. Here, do this in remembrance of me ...
Take a mirror, a hand mirror. Make like you are going to inspect your hair. You know, for fallout and stuff? OK. Now look right on top of that head of yours. What do you see? I know what I see.
I see a point. See my point? Right there on the top of your head.
Asked and answered, Your Honor. I rest my caboose.
Jim Mortellaro, AKA, Morty



This Site Served by TheHostPros