Fire/Arson Investigations :  Fire/Arson Investigations The fastest message board... ever.
A place to ask questions and add to probative and informative discussions associated with the various aspects of the field of fire investigation. -- FORUM RULES---BE CIVIL AND NO NAME CALLING, NO BELITTLING, NO BERATING, NO DENIGRATING others. Postings in violation of these rules can be removed or editted to remove the offending remarks at the discretion of the moderators and/or site administrator. 
Re: For Jim Mazerat
Posted by: dahebert (IP Logged)
Date: October 30, 2006 05:23PM

Pat, for ease of reading I have answered each of your questions individually. The answers are spliced between each of your quoted questions



PMK140 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Dan,
>
> I really don't know with any exactitude who is
> teaching bad science in your area. If I did I
> would "out" them.
>
> I know this, however:
>
> 1) Bad Science is being taught;
> 1.I agree.

> 2) People are being incarcerated and put to
> death, as a result of Bad Science;
> 2. I agree

> 3) If I know of any programs which promulgate Bad
> Science (not just the programs sponsored any one
> organization), I oppose them vigorously (sometime
> publicly, mostly privately with messages to the
> sponsoring agency);

> 3. I agree, and me to.

> 4) If anyone also knows of such instances, and
> they do not do anything to prevent or correct this
> (publicly or privately), then that person has made
> a morally and ethically unacceptable choice;
>
4. Without question, I Agree.


> 5) The National Association of Fire Investigators
> does not teach Bad Science. I have a fairly
> significant amount of control over what NAFI
> teaches.
>

5. I am aware of NAFI and have never heard, nor suggested that I heard of them teaching Bad Science. Don't read more into my post. Sometimes a cigar is just a cigar.


> 6) I have little control, other than vociferous
> complaint, over what other groups teach;

> 6. I agree. In my state especially and we all know why. Well, we may not all know why, but you sure as hell do...don't ya?


> 7) Those who religiously teach to the precepts of
> NFPA 921, do not teach Bad Science;
> 7. I agree. 921 all of the way.


> 8) Many teach “principles” not included or
> addressed in NFPA 921 (some of which “claim” to be
> teaching to NFPA 921), for good or ill;

8. Without question.
>
> 9) If every other organization taught to the
> principles of NFPA 921, no Bad Science would be
> taught;
>

9. Yep....I'm with ya.

> and
>
> 7) No one so far in this thread has mentioned any
> specific organization other than you.

7. (Not quite sure about your counting skills, but) I agree.



Subject Views Written By Posted
  For Jim Mazerat 1778 John J. Lentini, CFEI 10/25/2006 09:13PM
  Re: For Jim Mazerat 1090 Jim Mazerat 10/25/2006 09:21PM
  Re: For Jim Mazerat 1067 dahebert 10/30/2006 02:55PM
  Re: For Jim Mazerat 1030 PMK140 10/30/2006 03:44PM
  Re: For Jim Mazerat 987 dahebert 10/30/2006 05:23PM
  Re: For Jim Mazerat 975 dcarpenter 10/30/2006 03:47PM
  Re: For Jim Mazerat 994 dahebert 10/30/2006 06:20PM
  Re: For Jim Mazerat 887 dcarpenter 10/31/2006 09:09AM
  Re: For Jim Mazerat 928 dahebert 10/31/2006 09:45AM
  Re: Dan Hebert 1012 greggorbett 10/31/2006 09:34AM
  Re: Dan Hebert 950 dahebert 10/31/2006 10:21AM
  Re: For Dan Hebert 1029 PMK140 10/30/2006 04:13PM
  Re: For Dan Hebert 942 dahebert 10/30/2006 06:47PM
  Re: For Dan Hebert 1069 PMK140 10/30/2006 07:29PM
  Re: For Dan Hebert 880 dahebert 10/31/2006 09:13AM
  Re: For Dan Hebert 895 PMK140 10/31/2006 10:15AM
  Re: For Dan Hebert 959 dahebert 10/31/2006 10:31AM
  Re: For Dan Hebert 936 MIJ 10/30/2006 09:36PM
  Re: For Dan Hebert 926 dahebert 10/31/2006 09:03AM


Sorry, only registered users may post in this forum.
This forum powered by Phorum.