[Merged]architects and engineers for 9/11 truth = SCAM!

Well, the AIA isn't the liscensing authority over here. It's just a professional organization. I could join if I wanted to pay the dues, and I'm still a couple of years away from even being eligible to take the liscensing exam.
 
Architect said:
I find it ironic that AIA refuses to recognise European qualifications, although there is little doubt that they're equivalent standard, yet let this poor misguided fellow join.

:confused:
Click to expand...

I guess it's because this Gage bloke is unlikely to steal anybody's job. Can't be having qualified folks coming over from Europe and taking the jobs of hard working American Architects. Much better to sign up local loonies who will never get any work anyway.
 
I am not sure any real, honest, rational architect or engineer should join the site. I recall reading that he automatically puts your name on their protest/petition for another 9/11 investigation. Seems to me that should be an option, not something done automatically.

Not to mention, you would then be one of the "X" number of architects and engineers that he will quote as "Not believing the official story". Also something I do not think he should be doing without member approval.

TAM:)
 
Architect said:
I find it ironic that AIA refuses to recognise European qualifications, although there is little doubt that they're equivalent standard, yet let this poor misguided fellow join.

:confused:
Click to expand...
If they do not take action and ask Gage to remove the AIA symbol then they are like the BBB, just a club of guys to protect each other, not really living up to a code. (better business bureau)

I assume Gage had made his money before he went nuts. But there could be a bunch of nuts who believe in lies like him.
 
scissorhands said:
And I dont think I could have been more polite.
:confused:
Click to expand...

I was treading on eggshells over there, trying to draw out of a professional just why they should believe the wtc had to be cd.

All I got was a guy claiming to be a structual engineer (Griff) but unwilling to give his opinion about the structure of the towers, an electrical engineer called doug who didn't believe in experts just basic logic (read: Common sense) and a kid from LCF (citizen pawn).

e^n did sterling work trying to be reasonable but how he manages to remain composed is beyond me (though having read through the lcf thread that turned into a debate about abortion I can only conclude that e^n has the patience of a saint)
 
T.A.M. said:
I am not sure any real, honest, rational architect or engineer should join the site. I recall reading that he automatically puts your name on their protest/petition for another 9/11 investigation. Seems to me that should be an option, not something done automatically.

Not to mention, you would then be one of the "X" number of architects and engineers that he will quote as "Not believing the official story". Also something I do not think he should be doing without member approval.

TAM:)
Click to expand...

I think this is their plan, and exactly why a lot of us won't be joining. If Gage wants to limit discussion to those who already agree with his conclusions, I guess that's his prerogative.
 
ellindsey said:
CB_Brooklyn also turned up on the Straight Dope Message Board the other day, tried to push Judy Wood's energy beam dustification theory, and was laughed at.
Click to expand...

Wouldn't you love to see Cecil Adams take on the Twoofers? That would be one spectacular piece of literature.
 
No reponsible engineer or scientist can , in good concience, join a forum which has terms of service that include
Originally Posted by Richard Gage at ae911truth.org
you will be displayed as a member on our website demanding a Congressional investigation with subpoena power of the building collapses on 9/11. Architectural and engineering professionals will be displayed along with your professional status, City, and State or residence or practice after we contact you and verify your identity and credentials. "Others" will be displayed pending similar verification. You will then have access to the user forum.
Click to expand...


 
CptColumbo said:
So to participate in the forum, you are implying that you want a new congressional investigation?
Click to expand...

That's the way it reads to me.
By registering, " you will be displayed as a member on our website demanding a Congressional investigation"

I cannot see how that can be interpreted any other way.
 
Last edited:
rwguinn said:
That's the way it reads to me.
By registering, " you will be displayed as a member on our website demanding a Congressional investigation"

I cannot see how that can be interpreted any other way.
Click to expand...

Nice.

Well, that will certainly make any engineers and architects who disagree with their findings think twice before registering.
 
rwguinn said:
That's the way it reads to me.
By registering, " you will be displayed as a member on our website demanding a Congressional investigation"

I cannot see how that can be interpreted any other way.
Click to expand...


This is another good point. For the ASME Code of Ethics, I can see this as not "hold[ing] paramount the public . . . welfare" by calling for unnecessary, and therefore wasteful, additional investigations. More seriously, I also see it as "indiscriminat[e] critici[sm]" of other engineers' work; specifically those who prepared the ASCE and NIST reports.

I think I also brought this up about S911T, now that you've reminded me.
 
realcddeal said:
Why did NIST only test 1% of the beams for temperature effects?
Click to expand...
[ attempt to derail derail]
Before you post randomly in a previous thread, it would be good to learn the forum etiquette.
Start a new thread--or look up (there is a search function, if you'd like to learn to use it) what has been done and said on the topic first.
Otherwise, you look like another one of the spamming twoofers, and get treated abruptly.
In answer to the question, though--why should they look at anything other than root cause material?[/attemt to derail derail]
 
rwguinn said:
[ attempt to derail derail]
Before you post randomly in a previous thread, it would be good to learn the forum etiquette.
Start a new thread--or look up (there is a search function, if you'd like to learn to use it) what has been done and said on the topic first.
Otherwise, you look like another one of the spamming twoofers, and get treated abruptly.
In answer to the question, though--why should they look at anything other than root cause material?[/attemt to derail derail]
Click to expand...

rwgiunn, just so you know, I posted this first and then realized I should start a thread as it might be an interesting topic to discuss. It wasn't done at all with the intention of spamming.
 
JamesB said:
Hey, they took Mohammed Atta off the list. He is actually qualified for the group, he was an architecture grad student in Hamburg. If he weren't dead from flying a plane into the World Trade Center I am sure he would be very supportive of the group.
Click to expand...

I thought he was still alive :)
 
As a relatively new poster here, I'm simply flabergasted by people who have committed or are considering fraud to attack an organization like AE when the facts alone from FEMA, NIST, and the Federal Government should stand on their own.

Why would you discredit yourself in an attempt to discredit an organization?
Shouldn't the facts and experts alone discredit A/E911?

Your activities alone bring into doubt the official story. Why the need to commit fraud if the facts of the OS are exactly that?

IMHO, the tactics only bring into question why someone would do that with the end result being support for the official story that should stand on its own.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom